Georg von Charasoff: a neglected contributor to the classical-Marxian tradition. (2024)

Abstract: Since their re-discovery in the 1980s Georg vonCharasoff's previously neglected contributions to theclassical-Marxian approach to prices and income distribution, whichanticipate concepts and analytical results of Piero Sraffa, John vonNeumann, and Nobuo Okishio, have been appraised in several articles.Until recently, however, not much was known about Charasoff's lifeand the intellectual, political, and artistic circles in which he moved.The present paper fills this gap. It documents traces ofCharasoff's life and of his intellectual preoccupations that havebeen assembled from various archive sources in Azerbaijan, France,Georgia, Germany, Russia, and Switzerland.

'... a gifted scoundrel, mystical anarchist and proven genius,mathematician, poet, anything you like.'

(Boris Pasternak on Georg von Charasoff)

1 Introduction

Since Georg von Charasoff's previously neglectedcontributions, Karl Marx uber die menschliche und kapitalistischeWirtschaft (1909) and Das System des Marxismus. Darstellung und Kritik(1910), were rediscovered by Egidi and Gilibert (1984) several articlesand book chapters have been published that provide summary accounts,critical appraisals and comparative assessments of Charasoff'spioneering work on the classical-Marxian approach to prices and incomedistribution. (1)

Until recently, however, not much was known about Georg vonCharasoff's life. Prior to the essay of Klyukin (2008), whodiscovered some interesting details concerning the later phase ofCharasoff's life, almost all the known facts came from a shortcurriculum vitae, which Charasoff wrote at the age of 25 on the occasionof the submission of his doctoral dissertation at the University ofHeidelberg, and from the Prefaces of his two books on Marx'seconomic theory. The printed version of Charasoff's'Lebenslauf, which he submitted to the Faculty of Mathematics andNatural Sciences at the University of Heidelberg in 1902, reads: (2)

I was born on 24 June 1877 in Tbilisi. My parents were RussianArmenians. From 1886 to 1890 1 attended the first classical gymnasium inTbilisi; then after the death of my father 1 was sent to Odessa, where 1attended the classical Richelieu gymnasium. In 1893 1 returned toTbilisi and one year later 1 passed my final exam at the alreadymentioned gymnasium as an external pupil at the age of 18. Thereafter, Ibecame a student of medicine in Moscow. During the students'protests of 1896 I was expelled and forced to go abroad in order tocontinue my studies. I came to Heidelberg and here I decided, followingan inner impulse which already in Moscow 1 had difficulty insuppressing, to give up medicine and to turn to mathematics. So Ienrolled at the Faculty of Mathematics and Natural Sciences of theRuprecht-Karls-Universitat Heidelberg and after four years of study Isubmitted my dissertation and passed my doctoral examination on 27February 1901, (3) choosing mathematics as the main field and physicsand mechanics as supplementary fields. (Charasoff 1902: 68)

From the Preface of his first book on Marx's economic theorywe also know that Charasoff was living in Zurich in October 1908, andthat the book had emanated from a series of (public) lectures which hehad given in the course of the preceding three years. Moreover,Charasoff dedicated his book to 'My dear children Alex, Arthur, andHelene' and concluded his Preface with a note of thanks to 'myfriend Dr Otto Buek' (1909: ii and v). The Preface of the secondbook, Das System des Marxismus, is dated 'Lausanne, on 24 December1909' and it is dedicated to 'My friends Marie Charasoff andOtto Buek'.

The purpose of this essay is to supplement these slender pieces ofinformation with some further biographical details, in an attempt toreconstruct the personal, cultural and intellectual milieu in whichCharasoff developed his contributions to economic analysis. The mainemphasis will be on the period from 1897 to 1915, which Charasoff spentpredominantly in Germany and Switzerland, and on which some new findingscan be presented, based on archival research in Heidelberg, Zurich,Lausanne and elsewhere. It needs to be emphasised that the portrait ofthe man which emerges is still based on rather fragmentary pieces ofinformation, and that the available documents on which it draws exhibita particular bias: as Charasoff lived the life of a private scholarduring most of this period the few documents that have been preservedare mostly from administrative bodies.

The essay is organised as follows. Section 2 provides a shortsummary account of Charasoff's contributions to theclassical-Marxian tradition in economic theory. Section 3 provides someadditional details on Charasoff's family background and earlyeducation. In Section 4, the focus is on Charasoff's study periodat the University of Heidelberg, from 1897 to 1902, and on hisfriendship with Dr Otto Buek. In Section 5, some traces ofCharasoff's life in Zurich, in the period from 1902 to 1909, aredocumented. Section 6 turns to Charasoff's stay in Clarens andLausanne during the years 1909 and 1910. In Section 7, the contemporaryreception of his two books is briefly summarised. Section 8 covers theperiod from 1910 to 1912, in which Charasoff enrolled as a student ofpolitical economy at the University of Zurich. Section 9 discussesCharasoff's planned contribution to Roberto Michels'sHandworterbuch der Soziologie project. Section 10 then documents thecirc*mstances of Charasoff's return to Tbilisi in February 1915,and Section 11 informs about the (unauthorised) re-publication of majorparts of his books in two German literary-political journals in 1918,1920 and 1921. Last, section 12 provides an account of Charasoff'slife and intellectual preoccupations in the period from 1917 to 1931,which he spent in Tbilisi, Baku, and Moscow.

2 Charasoff's Contributions to the Classical-Marxian Tradition

Charasoff was one of the first economic theorists to recognise thatprices of production and the rate of profit can be determined by theeigenvector and eigenvalue of the input coefficients matrixrespectively. He not only anticipated most of the arguments that wereproposed later in the discussion of Marx's 'transformationproblem', but also noted the duality property of the price andquantity system, a finding that is usually associated with the seminalpaper of John von Neumann (1945-6 [1937]). Moreover, in the course ofhis investigation he defined and made use of the concepts of a'production series' (Produktionsreihe), of 'originalcapital' (Urkapital) and of 'basic products'(Grundprodukte), thus anticipating Piero Sraffa (1960) with regard tothe related concepts of a reduction series to dated quantities oflabour, the Standard commodity, and the basics/non-basics distinction.In addition, Charasoff also anticipated the so-called 'FundamentalMarxian theorem' of Michio Morishima (1973) and the theorem of therising rate of profit from the introduction of technical progress, whichis generally attributed to Nobuo Okishio, that is, the so-called'Okishio theorem' (1961). Although Charasoff'sargumentation was undoubtedly based on mathematical reasoning, he choseto present it in non-mathematical form, using only simple numericalexamples. From a mathematical point of view, it is remarkable thatCharasoff failed to make use of (and in spite of a number of sharedmathematical interests apparently was unfamiliar with) thenewly-developed theorems of Perron and Frobenius on eigenvalues andeigenvectors of positive and non-negative matrices (see Parys 2014).However, according to Mori (2013), Charasoff in fact anticipated themethod of the so-called 'von Mises iteration' in some of hisarguments.

Since Charasoff's findings on the determination of productionprices and the rate of profits partly resemble results obtained alreadya decade earlier by Vladimir Karpovich Dmitriev ([1898] 1974), itdeserves to be mentioned that there is no indication that Charasoff hadread Dmitriev's 1898 essay on Ricardo's theory of value,although he refers to the famous paper by Ladislaus von Bortkiewicz of1906-7 (which contains a reference to Dmitriev) in his second book. (4)At any rate, Charasoff'submitted his first economic manuscript(which is not extant, but which seems to have contained his mainfindings with regard to these problems) already in January 1907 (seeSection 5 below). Thus, it can be supposed he had developed his ideasbefore having read von Bortkiewicz's paper.

3 Charasoff's Family Background and Early Education in Tbilisiand Odessa

In the hand-written version of his curriculum vitae Charasoffrefers to his parents as 'Russian subjects, Armenians of theArmenian-Gregorian faith' (H-V 3/2, Universitatsarchiv Heidelberg),which suggests that he and his family regarded themselves as'russified Armenians' (rather than as Russians). When he firstenrolled at the University of Heidelberg in 1897 Charasoff inserted'burgrave' (Burggraf) in the entry 'Profession of thefather', while in a later document he wrote 'Statecouncillor' (Staatsrat) - presumably his father was both.Charasoff's family must have been fairly wealthy; in Zurich Georgvon Charasoff 'was known as a very rich man', as Dr Haberli,who was appointed guardian of his children in 1919, put it in an aidememoire (Vormundschaftsakten 'Kinder Charasoff, StadtarchivZurich). In a document of 1910, which he had to complete in French,Charasoff gave as his own profession: 'Docteur en sciences'and 'rentier' (Fiches controles des habitants 1910,Stadtarchiv Lausanne). His daughter Lily (b. 1903) stated in a letter ofDecember 1919, which she sent from Tbilisi to her brothers, that theirfather 'has lost all his wealth, which is now in the hands of theRussian government' (Vormundschaftsakten 'Kinder Charasoff,Stadtarchiv Zurich). This implies that the (landed) property of theCharasoff family must have been outside of Georgia, presumably inArmenia or in the Ukraine, since in December 1919 Georgia was still aDemocratic Republic, which had not yet been occupied by the Red Army.Lily Charasoff also stated, in a letter of December 1919 to herstepbrother Alexander, that 'we still own a factory, but this isout of use and earns us no money' (Vormundschaftsakten 'KinderCharasoff', Stadtarchiv Zurich), which implies that in 1919 Georgvon Charasoff must also have owned a factory in independent Georgia,besides his (landed) property which had been seized by the new Russiangovernment. When Charasoff enrolled at the University of Zurich in 1910,he gave as his parents' address 'Frauen B. v. Ch, Tbilisi,Gribojedowska N. 3' (Matrikeledition, Universitat Zurich), whichsuggests not only that his mother was still alive in 1910, but also thatshe had not re-married after his father's early death in 1890. Indocuments of 1919, which are preserved in the municipal archive inZurich and concern Charasoff's four children, there is no mentionof their paternal grandparents (but their maternal grandparents arestated as living in Odessa). There is, however, a reference to an aunt(that is, a sister of Georg von Charasoff), who is stated as living inBaku, Azerbaijan (Vormundschaftsakten 'Kinder Charasoff,Stadtarchiv Zurich).

Childhood and youth in Tbilisi and Georgia around 1880

Only some rather general information can be provided with regard toGeorg von Charasoff's childhood and youth. Throughout thenineteenth century Georgia and its capital Tbilisi were part of theRussian empire. However, after the formal annexation by Tsar Paul I inJanuary 1801, the Russians succeeded only in controlling the easternpart of Georgia, while the mountainous regions in the west remainedindependent for another decade; Russia indeed never obtained fullcontrol over all of the mountainous regions in Western Georgia. Underthe Russian reign, Georgia was subjected to an intensive'Russification' in order to adapt its cultural, social andadministrative system to that of the Russian empire. At the same time,Georgia was also opened up to Western ideas and culture. In themid-nineteenth century, enlightenment ideals, liberalism and modernnationalism blossomed in Georgia. European literature was translatedinto Georgian, European art and music were imported and amalgamated withlocal traditions, and there developed an interesting cultural andartistic life in Tbilisi, which was sometimes referred to as the'Paris of the East'.

In order to silence Georgian (and Armenian) calls for independenceand to secure the Russian authority, the Tsar installed Count MichailVoroncov as 'Viceroy of the Caucasus'. Voroncov, who had beeneducated in England, modernised trade, industry, infrastructure and townplanning, introduced primary schools and founded two gymnasiums, one inTbilisi and one in Kutaissi. However, it was only in 1917, after thefall of the Russian Empire, that a Polytechnical University was firstopened in Tbilisi, followed by a State University in 1918. Serfdom wasofficially abolished in Georgia in 1866, but semi-feudal relationsremained in place for a considerable time. The gymnasiums in Tbilisi andKutaissi were mn on rigorous disciplinary lines, following the Russianeducational system. Not surprisingly, many young Georgians weredecidedly anti-Tsarist and antiRussian, and open to radical patrioticand revolutionary messages (Hausmann 1998: 172). In 1880, the Georgiancapital Tbilisi had 86,455 inhabitants of which 38,513 were Armenians,22,285 Georgians, and 19,804 Russians (Jersild and Melkadze 2002: 47).

The gymnasium years in Odessa

The Richelieu gymnasium, which Georg von Charasoff attended from1890 to 1893, was one of several institutions which had been founded bythe Duke of Richelieu during his reign in Odessa. It was intended as agymnasium for the sons of Odessa's wealthy merchants, sincetraditionally only the male offspring of the aristocracy was admittedinto higher education. The so-called Richelieu Lyceum, founded in 1817,was transformed into the New-Russian University after the Crimean war.In 1890, when Charasoff arrived in Odessa, the University had threefaculties and some 428 students: a historical-philological faculty, afaculty of physics and mathematics, and a law faculty (Hausmann 1998:105-19). The classical Richelieu gymnasium was located in the inner citydistrict Chersone, right next to the New-Russian University and thecommercial college. Close by in the same district was also theGerman-Lutheran church St Pauli with the associated junior high school'Zum Heiligen Paulus', which Leon Trotsky attended from 1888.The rich aristocrats and wealthy merchants lived in the adjacentBoulevard district, where also the banks, the stock exchange, the operahouse and the theatre were located.

Odessa was the economic, administrative and cultural centre ofSouthern Ukraine. In the nineteenth century it was a rapidly growingcity, whose wealth was predominantly related to trade. Of major economicimportance was Odessa's harbour, through which the export of grainand other agricultural products from the Southern Ukraine took place.The international grain export business was first controlled by Greekmerchants, but from the mid-nineteenth century until 1917 it wasdominated mainly by Jewish merchants. Odessa's industrialisationstarted rather late, only towards the end of the 1870s, but even then itconsisted mainly of sugar and grain mills, packaging factories forcoffee, tea and tobacco, and a machine industry which produced mainlyagricultural equipment. Between 1870 and 1897 the number of inhabitantsincreased from 140,000 to over 400,000. In 1892, 57.5% of Odessa'spopulation was Orthodox, 33% Jewish, 5.8% Catholic and 2.3% Protestant.Armenians accounted for a mere 0.3% of the population, but among thestudents their number was much larger, and in the students'protests against the Tsarist regime Armenians and Georgians stronglyparticipated. Although 95% of the Jews earned their living as craftsmenor small shopkeepers and thus belonged to the lower middle-class, theincreasing presence of Jews in the intellectual and economic elite ofthe city repeatedly led to attacks and even pogroms against the Jews (asin 1881 and in 1905). (5)

Of Charasoff's study period in Moscow and his expulsion fromthere, no further information can be provided beyond that given in hiscurriculum vitae.

4 Charasoff as a Student in Heidelberg

Heidelberg, in the second half of the nineteenth century, was oneof the most important intellectual centres for Russians in Germany. The'Russian colony' in Heidelberg consisted not so much ofwriters and artists, as in Berlin, but rather of students and youngscientists. A first wave of Russian students came to Heidelberg in theperiod from 1861 to 1865, after the closure of the University of StPetersburg. In those years more than one-hundred Russians studied inHeidelberg. Later, there was a second and a third 'wave', inthe mid-1890s and around 1905-06, when relegations of students in Moscowand St Petersburg, in the aftermath of the unsuccessful revolution,again brought large numbers of Russians to Heidelberg.

In the second half of the nineteenth century Heidelberg wasgenerally considered a centre of excellence in the natural sciences, andstudents from the Russian empire typically studied chemistry, physics orphysiology with such internationally renowned professors as RobertBunsen, Gustav Kirchhoff, or Hermann von Helmholtz. The Law faculty ofHeidelberg University also attracted talented Russian students, and manywealthy young Russians used Heidelberg as their temporary base fortravelling in Western Europe. Its central location, mild climate and lowliving-costs made it an ideal base for travels to France, Italy orSwitzerland: 'For some Russians Heidelberg was a sort of cureresort with a little scientific program on the side' (Birkenmaier1995: 41). Ever since the 1860s Heidelberg was also one of the centresof Russian revolutionary propaganda in the West. While the leadingrevolutionaries lived in London, Paris, or Geneva, close collaboratorsand associates of men like Alexander Herzen or Michail Bakunin werebased in Heidelberg, from where they organised the (illegal) printingand dissemination of revolutionary writings. The 'leftist'group of the Russian students in Heidelberg had its own meeting place,which eventually became a special Russian library, and which 'heldnot only banned Russian books, but also the latest French, German andBritish books and magazines with a socialist orientation'(Birkenmaier 1995: 10). The 'Russian reading room' (RussischeLesehalle), also known as 'Pirogov's reading room'(Pirogov'sche Lesehalle), became an important institution in thecultural and intellectual life of Heidelberg. Max Weber, who had closecontacts with some Russian students after 1903, gave a public lecturethere in 1905 and also participated actively in the festivitiescelebrating the 50th birthday of the 'Russian reading room' in1912. (6)

Georg von Charasoff lived in Heidelberg from October 1897 toFebruary 1902. Throughout this period he was enrolled as a regularstudent in the Faculty of Mathematics and Natural Sciences. TheUniversity address book shows that he lived during his entire studyperiod in rented rooms as a tenant: from the winter term 1897-98 to theend of the summer term 1899 he lived in Gaisbergstrasse 27; thereafterin Schiffgasse 2, and in the following semesters until the end of thewinter term 1901-02 he lived in Lauerstrasse 5. In his first year atGaisbergstrasse 27 Charasoff enjoyed the company of a fellow studentfrom his home town, Tbilisi, Georg Melik-Karakosoff, the son of aTbilisian 'Hofrat', a high-ranked public servant, also of theArmenian-Gregorian faith, who studied philosophy in Heidelberg. Inaddition, the two brothers Michail and Vadim Reisner from St Petersburgalso lived in Gaisbergstrasse 27 during Charasoff's first year inHeidelberg. (7) At the turn of the twentieth century, the group ofRussian social revolutionaries in Heidelberg included, inter alia,Vladimir Zenzinov, Boris Savinkov, Abram Goc, Il'ja Fondaminskij,Amalja Gavronskaja and Jakov Gavronskij. In a study on the Russianstudents in Heidelberg it is noted that 'Schiffgasse 2 was for along time in Russian hands: in the summer term 1901 Jakov Gavronskijlived there; in the summer term 1902 it was Abram Goc; and in the summerterm 1903 and the winter term 1903/04 it was the Fondaminskijs whor*sided there' (Birkenmaier 1995: 161). Interestingly, in theprevious year, that is, in the winter term 1899-1900 and the summer term1900, Georg von Charasoff resided in Schiffgasse 2. Whether this ispurely accidental or Charasoff had close contacts with some of thesocial revolutionaries could not be ascertained.

Studying mathematics in Heidelberg

Charasoff wrote his doctoral dissertation under the supervision ofLeo Konigsberger (1837-1921), a distinguished mathematician who hadstudied with Karl Weierstrass in Berlin and then held professorships inGreifswald (1864-69), Heidelberg (1869-75), Dresden (1875-77), Vienna(1877-84) and Heidelberg (1884-1914). Konigsberger is best known for hisbiography of Helmholtz (Konigsberger 1902-3, 1906), apart from hiscontributions to the analysis of elliptic and hyper-elliptic functions.In the course of his long academic career Konigsberger attracted anumber of excellent students, including some future Nobel laureates. (8)In 1870, Ludwig Boltzmann came to Heidelberg for postgraduate studieswith Konigsberger, and thirty-two years later Max Born spent the summerterm 1902 in Heidelberg in order to attend Konigsberger's lectureson differential geometry. Other famous disciples of Leo Konigsberger arethe mathematician (and pianist) Alfred Pringsheim and the astronomer MaxWolf. The group of Konigsberger's doctoral students in the periodfrom 1897 to 1902, when Charasoff was in Heidelberg, included MaxBirkenstaedt, Marcus Lewin, Nathan Mannheimer, Friedrich Rosch andSiegfried Valentiner.

On 22 November 1901 Georg Charasoff was announced as the winner ofa prize essay competition of the Natural Sciences Faculty (Chronik derStadt Heidelberg 1902: 58-9). The essay he had submitted in October 1901is a hand-written text of 101 pages, entitled 'Parallelogrammummysticum' (see Universitatsarchiv Heidelberg, Preisschriften,H-V-3/2, PR 126). Just a few weeks later, in a letter of 20 January1902, Charasoff applied for admission to the final examination for adoctorate; interestingly, this application was sent from Geneva (rue deHesse, 4). The dissertation thesis he submitted was a slightly revisedcopy of his prize essay. The thesis defensio and final examination tookplace on 27 February 1902; shortly afterwards, Charasoff published histhesis under the title 'Arithmetische Untersuchungen uberIrreduktibilitat' (1902). The available documents in the Universityarchive show that the thesis was graded 'summa cum laude', butthe reports of Konigsberger and the second examiner are not extant. (9)While Charasoff's dissertation was listed in several mathematicsjournals, it was not reviewed, which suggests that it was not consideredimportant. For analyses of the relationship between Charasoff'swork in pure mathematics and the mathematical tools that he used--andfailed to use--in his economic studies see Mori (2013) and Parys (2014).

Charasoff's friendship with Otto Buek

In the Preface of Karl Marx uber die menschliche undkapitalistische Wirtschaft Charasoff thanked his 'friend Dr OttoBuek ... for advice and support during the writing of this book and formany ideas which I formed from conversations with him' (1909: nopage number). Who was Dr Otto Buek? How did Charasoff get to know himand what was Buek's role in the development of Charasoff'scontributions to economic theory? Is it perhaps possible to throw somelight, via Buek, on the circle of intellectuals with whom Charasoff wasin contact?

Otto Buek was a German-Russian philosopher, editor and translator.He was born on 18 November 1873 in St Petersburg and died in 1966, aged93, lonely and impoverished, in a home for the elderly near Paris. Afterattending the German gymnasium in his home town Buek enrolled as astudent at the Faculty of Mathematics and Physics of the University ofSt Petersburg in 1891, with chemistry as his main field of study.Already in his gymnasium years, and in fact throughout his life, hepursued several intellectual interests simultaneously. He is known tohave been remarkably well-read when he was still in his early twenties.He not only had a good knowledge of the contemporary literature in thenatural sciences, but had studied carefully also the works of Kant,Hegel and Nietzsche, the writings of the French socialists, and thefirst two volumes of Marx's Kapital. Moreover, he also had anintimate knowledge of Russian literature from Tolstoy to Gogol. In hisyouth, he was a close friend of Lou Salome (after her marriage: LouAndreas-Salome), who later became famous as the 'Russian muse'of Friedrich Nietzsche and Rainer Maria Rilke, and as SigmundFreud's disciple (and Anna Freud's confidante). In the winterterm 1896-97 Buek moved to Heidelberg, where he first continued hisstudies in chemistry and mathematics, but then switched over tophilosophy. In the winter term 1899-1900 he left Heidelberg in order toenrol at the Phillips-Universitat Marburg, where he wrote his doctoraldissertation under the supervision of the Neo-Kantian philosopherHermann Cohen, the head of the 'Marburg school'. (10) Histhesis on 'Die Atomistik und Faradays Begriff der Materie: einelogische Untersuchung' (Atomism and Faraday's notion ofmatter: a logical analysis) (Buek 1905a; see also Buek 1904 and 1912)won him a prize essay competition Around Cohen and Paul Natorp inMarburg a Kantian-socialist group had formed, which included RobertMichels, Kurt Eisner and Otto Buek, and which sympathised withsyndicalism and anarchism, drawing inspiration in particular fromTolstoy's works (Hanke 1993: 130). During his time in Marburg Buekalso contributed to the election campaign of his friend Robert Michels,who ran as a candidate for the German Reichstag as a representative ofthe syndicalist faction of the Social Democrats.

In 1905 Buek moved to Berlin, where he lived a bohemian life as aprivate scholar and intellectual, earning his living as an editor,translator and journalist. He edited, co-edited and translated, interalia, a German edition of Gogol's works (8 vols, 1909-1912) and aGerman edition of Turgenev's collected works (12 vols, 1910-1931;jointly with Kurt Wildhagen). He was also involved in the editorial workfor Ernst Cassirer's monumental edition of Immanuel Kant'sworks. Moreover, he also edited and translated Alexander Herzen'sErinnerungen and several of Tolstoy's novels (from Russian intoGerman), as well as the works of Unamuno (from Spanish into German). Inthe 1920s, he was the European correspondent of the Argentiniannewspaper La Nacion.

Buek and Charasoff presumably met during their study period inHeidelberg. From the summer term 1898 until the end of the summer term1899 Buek took residence in Gaisbergstrasse 27, where Georg vonCharasoff had already resided since the winter term 1897-98. WhetherBuek's move to Gaisbergstrasse 27 was motivated by an alreadyexisting friendship between the two men, or whether the latter formedonly afterwards, could not be ascertained. Buek's circle of friendsand acquaintances from his student days in Heidelberg included GeorgFriedrich Nicolai from St Petersburg, then a medical student, whom helater supported in his peace initiatives, and the bohemian, philosopherand journalist, Kurt Wildhagen.

In Berlin, where he lived from 1905 to 1933, Buek belonged to thecircle around Alfred Richard Meyer, who was one of the major figures inthe German arts and literature scene at the beginning of the twentiethcentury. Buek had close contacts with a large number of intellectuals,artists and writers, many of whom had radical left-wing or anarchisticleanings. He was a close friend of the anarchist writer Senna Hoy(pseudonym of Johannes Holzmann) (11) and of Franz Pfemfert, the editorof the literary-political journal Die Aktion (see Pfemfert 1911-32).Buek's circle of friends also included the publisher Max Brod, theexpressionist poet (and later minister of culture and education in theGDR) Johannes R. Becher, and the philosopher, Ernst Cassirer.

In the summer of 1905 Buek travelled to Zurich, where he met withthe Swiss anarchists Fritz Brupbacher, Max Tobler and Raphael Friedebergin order to discuss the founding of an anarchistic journal. In theautumn he briefly returned to Berlin, but then travelled to Zurichagain, this time in the company of Senna Hoy. From Zurich he moved on toAscona, where he stayed in the Monte verita community, the bohemiancommune and artists' colony that had been founded by the brothersKarl and Gustav Graser. Around the turn of the century, the Monte verita(Mountain of truth) was a well-known meeting place for anarchists andfreethinkers, but also for the artistic and intellectual elite (amongstothers, men like Hermann Hesse, Ernst Bloch, C.G. Jung, James Joyce,Rainer Maria Rilke and Paul Klee visited the Monte verita). Buekreturned to the Monte verita again in the spring and summer of 1906,first for a few weeks (in April) and then again for a full two months(in May and June). At this time there was an international meeting ofanarchists and freethinkers on the Monte verita, which was meant toexplore 'the possibilities for the foundation of a higher schoolfor the liberation of mankind'. In June and July 1907 Buek returnedto Switzerland again and spent a few weeks in a cure resort at SchlossMarbach am Untersee, together with Georg von Charasoff.

From his student days in Heidelberg Buek entertained a lifelongfriendship with Nicolai, who later taught at the Charite in Berlin. InOctober 1914 Buek was one of the three signees, together with AlbertEinstein and the astronomer Friedrich Wilhelm Forster, of Nicolai'santi-war pamphlet 'Aufruf an die Europaer' (Call to theEuropeans), which was an antipode to the pamphlet 'An dieKulturwelt!' (To the cultured world!). The latter pamphlet, whichthe German government used to justify the military invasion of neutralBelgium, was signed by more than two-hundred natural and socialscientists from the German Reich. Nicolai's counterpamphlet wassigned by only four men: Nicolai, Buek, Forster and Einstein. Itspublication was prohibited by the authorities in the German Reich. (Itwas only published in 1917 in Switzerland, as an introduction toNicolai's anti-war book Biologie des Krieges.) Of particularinterest in the present context is Otto Buek's friendship withAlbert Einstein, which is well-documented for the period from 1914 to1931, when both lived in Berlin. The philosopher Don Howard, who hasworked extensively on Einstein's philosophy of science, stated:

Paul Natorp was the first major neo-Kantian to publish his thoughtson relativity, these concerning special relativity, in his influentialDie logischen Grundlagen der exakten Wissenschaften (1910).... We haveno direct evidence of Einstein's having read Natorp, and certainlyno record of his reaction to Natorp. He is likely to have been familiarwith Natorp's views on relativity, though, if only through theintermediary of Otto Buek, one of the favorite students of Natorp andCohen, who struck up something of a friendship with Einstein during thelatter's first couple of years in Berlin, 1914-1915.... Discussionswith Buek may have awakened Einstein's interest in thinking aboutKant and relativity. (Howard 1994: 50)

According to Howard, Buek and Einstein met regularly in 1914 and1915, often in Nicolai's house, in order to discuss philosophicalissues and to play music together: (12) 'By late 1914 he [Buek] haddeveloped a fairly close and regular relationship with Einstein, who hadmoved to Berlin ... in April of that year' (Howard 1993: 191). (13)In the early 1920s Buek was also involved, together with Nicolai andProfessor Otto Fanta from Prague, in the making of the first sciencefilm, which was shown under the title 'Die Grundlagen derEinsteinschen Relativitatstheorie' (The foundations ofEinstein's relativity theory) (see Goenner 2005: 160-1) AlthoughEinstein distanced himself from this film, his friendship with Buekremained intact. After his return from a lecture series in Argentina in1923, Einstein discussed his travel impressions with Buek and they alsomet in various scientific societies in order to discuss possiblephilosophical interpretations of quantum mechanics (Goenner 2005:161-2).

In a short 'Tableau chronologique sur ma vie', which hecomposed in 1963 at the age of 90, Buek noted: '1931-33: Avenementde Hitler, Einstein et moi passons le meme an 1933 a l'etranger,moi-en France, lui en Amerique' (1931-33: Rise of Hitler, Einsteinand I move abroad in the same year 1933, I--to France, he--to America)(Nachlass Szittya, DLA Marbach). But while Einstein's fame rose tonew heights with his move to Princeton, Buek's forced move intoFrench exile led to loneliness and material deprivation. In 1953, whenBuek was seriously in need of help, his friend Emil Szittya, an artistand writer, wrote to Einstein for financial support, who was immediatelywilling to help: 'I remember Mr Buek very well from the time of theFirst World War. He is a fine character and a reliable man with a socialconscience.' (14)

5 Charasoff's Stay in Zurich as a Private Scholar, 1902-1909

It is unclear where Charasoff'spent the next six months afterhe had obtained his doctorate in Heidelberg in February 1902 and beforehe moved to Zurich, where he was registered from 24 October 1902 onwards(Meldekarte 'Charasoff, Stadtarchiv Zurich). In the interim periodhe married his first wife, Marie Seldovic, who came from a Jewish familyin Odessa. The date and place of their marriage could not beascertained, but their son Andreas Arthenius ('Arthur') wasborn in Zurich on 5 November 1902. In the following year, their daughterBarbara Lydia Helene ('Lily') was also born in Zurich, on 11December 1903. A further member of the Charasoff family was Alexander('Alex') von Charasoff, who was born on 17 March 1900 inStrasbourg. According to the birth entry in the municipal archive inStrasbourg, Alexander was the illegitimate child of Anna MagdalenaSeldovic (in some documents: Anna Hanela Seldowitsch or Zeltowitsch)from Odessa, who was born on 31 July 1878 in Beresino, Russia. The childwas subsequently 'legitimised' by Anna Seldovic'smarriage with Ladislaus von Studnicki-Gisbert, on 22 September 1900, inZurich. It is unclear how Alexander came into Georg Charasoff'sfamily. One possibility is that he was adopted by Anna Seldovic'ssister Marie and her husband, Georg von Charasoff. Another possibility,which also cannot be excluded, is that Alexander's mother,'Anna', and Charasoff's wife 'Marie' Seldovicare one and the same person.

At the time of his marriage, in September 1900, Ladislaus vonStudnicki-Gisbert was a law student of Polish descent at the Universityof Zurich. Ten years before, as a law student in Warsaw, he had beenostracised to Siberia for socialist propaganda, where he stayed from1890 to 1896. In 1899-1900 he was enrolled at the Law Faculty of theUniversity of Heidelberg (Matrikeleintrag, UniversitatsarchivHeidelberg); thereafter he continued his studies at the University ofZurich, where he was officially enrolled from the summer term 1900 tothe end of the summer term 1901 (Matrikeledition der UniversitatZurich). However, in spring 1901 he appears to have returned to Warsawwithout de-registering at the University of Zurich. Anna MagdalenaStudnicki-Gisbert, nee Seldovic, was enrolled as a student ofmathematics at the University of Zurich in the winter term 1900-01(Matrikeledition der Universitat Zurich). According to the matriculationdocuments in Zurich, she had previously studied mathematics at theUniversities of Bonn and Heidelberg as a so-called'Hospitantin', which means that she was allowed to attendlectures but could not take any exams (women were only accepted asregular students at the University of Heidelberg from 1900 onwards). Itis very likely, of course, that Charasoff knew both Anna Seldovic andLadislaus von Studnicki-Gisbert from his student days in Heidelberg.

In Zurich, Charasoff appears to have led the life of an independentprivate scholar. Although his varying addresses are all close to theUniversity and the central library, he did not enrol as a regularstudent before 1910. There is some evidence that Charasoff took a deepinterest in Tolstoyanism, studying carefully Tolstoy's works andexchanging several letters, between 1902 and 1908, with VladimirChertkov, the major representative of the Tolstoyan movement in England(see Charasoff's letters in the Chertkov Papers at RGALI, Moscow).However, in his first years in Zurich, his main intellectualpreoccupation still seems to have been mathematics. This can be inferredfrom a letter he sent to the mathematician David Hilbert of theUniversity of Gottingen on 10 May 1904, which has been preserved in theHilbert Papers. In this letter, Charasoff responded to Hilbert'scommentary on a set of papers which he had sent him earlier, and whichHilbert had apparently returned with the remark that Charasoff'smain results had already been proved by Hermann Minkowski. Charasofffully accepted Hilbert's judgement, noting that 'from yourassessment I now realise that I was apparently not sufficiently familiarwith all the contributions of Minkowski' (Nachlass David Hilbert,Code MS Hilbert 59, Staats-und Universitatsbibliothek Gottingen). Inspite of this set-back, Charasoff seems to have continued hismathematical studies; in the summer term 1905 he enrolled as an'Auditor' at the University of Zurich for the lecture on'Elliptische Funktionen' (Elliptic functions) by ProfessorHeinrich Burkhardt. (15) Interestingly, at this very time Burkhardt wasone of the two examiners of Albert Einstein's inauguraldissertation Eine neue Bestimmung der Molekuldimensionen, which Einsteinhad submitted on 30 April 1905. It seems likely, therefore, thatEinstein's seminal contribution may have caught Charasoff'sattention very early on through conversations on mathematics and physicswhich he surely had with Burkhardt.

There are only few other traces of Charasoff's personal lifeand intellectual preoccupations in this period. In 1904, he apparentlymade a comment during a lecture on 'Scientific socialism andreligion' that Georgij Plekhanov had delivered in Zurich. This isdocumented in Plekhanov's 'Notes during the discussion of thereport', among which there is inter alia the following remark ofPlekhanov on 'G. Kharazov's bewilderment': 'If weare to agree with him, we must admit that the question of religion isfinished. The existence of God cannot be proved. He considers my ideascommon to all people. Very glad!' (Plekhanov 1976: 61).

An important event in Charasoff's personal life must also haveoccurred in this period: his first wife, Marie Seldovic, must have diedsometime between 1904 and 1906. Her death is registered in officialdocuments of 1919, which concern the Charasoff children and which havebeen preserved in the municipal archive in Zurich (Vormundschaftsakten'Kinder Charasoff, Stadtarchiv Zurich). In these documents neitherthe exact date nor the circ*mstances of her death are given, but sinceLily was born in December 1903 and Charasoff publicly showed up with agirlfriend in spring 1907 (see below), it must have occurred in theinterim period from 1904 to 1906.

Around 1904-05, and in parallel to his mathematical studies,Charasoff also began to study the works of Menger, Bohm-Bawerk andWalras. In the Preface of Das System des Marxismus, dated December 1909,he stated that he had only become familiar with those works 'in thecourse of the last four years'. Charasoff must have studied theworks of the classical political economists and of Marx much earlier,because he also states in his Preface that he had developed the mainideas of his treatise, including the notion of a 'productionseries', long before he had read the works of Menger andBohm-Bawerk. It is also clear, from references in his books, that he wasacquainted with the contemporary literature on Marx's economictheory, including Tugan-Baranovsky (1905) and Bortkiewicz (1906-07).

In January 1907 Charasoff submitted a manuscript on Marx'stheory of value and distribution, via Otto Buek, to Karl Kautsky, theeditor of the journal Die Neue Zeit. Kautsky rejected the manuscript andreturned it to Buek, who forwarded the rejection letter to Charasoff.Apparently, Buek was involved because he had been responsible forproducing a German translation of Charasoff's manuscript. Neitherthe manuscript and submission letter nor Kautsky's rejection letteris extant, but a letter from Georg von Charasoff to Karl Kautsky of 7February 1907 has been preserved in the Kautsky Papers (Correspondence DVII 66, International Institute of Social History, Amsterdam). In thisletter Charasoff informed Kautsky that he did not consider the reasonswhich the latter had given for his rejection of the paper convincing andthat he was keen to read a more detailed criticism of his views. (For amore detailed discussion of the Charasoff-Kautsky correspondence, seeMori 2007). Since the manuscript is not extant, it is unclear which ofthe concepts and ideas from his later books were contained already inCharasoff's paper, which--had it been accepted by Kautsky--wouldhave appeared almost simultaneously with von Bortkiewicz's famoustwo papers (1906-7, 1907; see also 1952 [1906-7]).

In the summer term 1907 Charasoff enrolled as an'Auditor' at the University of Zurich again, this time inorder to attend a four-hour lecture on 'Psychiatrische Klinik'(Clinical psychiatry) by Professor Eugen Bleuler. (16) As we shall seebelow (in Section 12), Charasoff in fact took a keen interest inpsychoanalysis and seems to have studied Sigmund Freud's and C.G.Jung's writings very carefully. In June and July 1907 he stayed fora cure treatment in the 'Kur-und Heilanstalt Schloss Marbach amUntersee (Bodensee)', for the most part in the company of hisfriend Otto Buek. This can be inferred from the correspondence of LidijaPetrowna Kotschetkowa, who refers to Charasoff repeatedly in some of herletters to her husband, the anarchist, publicist and medicalpractitioner to the poor, Fritz Brupbacher. In Kotschetkowa'saccount, the group of cure guests at 'Schloss Marbach'consisted partly of medium-ranked and high-ranked nobility from Russiaand Western Europe ('The Duke of Parma with his entourage, etc.etc.'), but also of social revolutionaries from Russia, like LeonidSchisko and Vera Figner. (17) Kotschetkowa commented on Charasoff'spersonality in several letters. She was highly critical of him, andstrongly disapproved of his manners and conversation:

A conceitedness, self-satisfaction and smugness which I haveelsewhere encountered only in Bulgarians. All the time at the dinnertable he talks about great things--the making of bombs, killings ofanarchists, maltreatments in the German army, catholic religion, etc.etc.--and all this in a rather loud voice, and of course in German,among Germans and Catholics.... He fails to notice that nobody isinterested in his conversation and that his style of arguing is simplyunpleasant. He is not a wise man and I really regret that he does notget his nerves cured by Veraguth. (18) (Kotschetkowa to Brupbacher, 16July 1907, Brupbacher Papers MFC 37, Schweizerisches Sozialarchiv)

In one of her earlier letters she observed:

Today Charasoff let his girlfriend (a young female student--Jewish)come here from Zurich. She dined with us at the dinner-table and satbetween Charasoff and Buek. The former I cannot stand at all. He reallygets on my nerves. This brutal, worn face, this self-contentedness andmegalomania are just disgusting. He eats, speaks, makes stupid jokes andtalks nonsense--just horrible. An animal--or a rather vulgar person!(Kotschetkowa to Brupbacher, 17 June 1907, Brupbacher Papers MFC 37,Schweizerisches Sozialarchiv)

Kotschetkowa's description of Charasoff's girlfriendmatches with the known facts about his later second wife, MarieKriegshaber, so that we may assume that it is the same person. In thefollowing months, Charasoff continued to work on his economicmanuscripts on Marx's theory of value and distribution, andeventually must have decided to publish his ideas in book form ratherthan as articles. He wrote the finishing sentences of the Preface to thefirst book, Karl Marx uber die menschliche und kapitalistischeWirtschaft, on '12 October 1908' (Charasoff 1909: page notnumbered).

6 Charasoff's Stay in Clarens and Lausanne

In February 1909 Charasoff moved to Clarens, which was then a smallvillage near Montreux (of which it now is a suburb) at Lake Geneva. Heobtained a 'permis de sejour' (residence permission) for threeyears, but he left Clarens already on 26 August 1909 in order to take upresidence in nearby Lausanne (Stadtarchiv Montreux, MeldeaktenCharasoff-Kriegshaber). Throughout his stay he was accompanied by histhree children and by Marie Kriegshaber.

Clarens has a long tradition as a vacation and cure resort, withluxurious hotels, numerous guest-houses, and excellent restaurants. Thelittle village on the 'Swiss Riviera' was particularly popularamong Russian guests and was visited by artists and intellectuals likeLeo Tolstoy, Pyotr Ilyich Tchaikovsky, Igor Stravinsky, Maurice Ravel,Arthur Rubinstein and Vladimir Nabokov. (19) Igor Stravinsky first cameto Clarens, like Charasoff, in spring 1909, and he returned there inautumn 1910 in order to settle down for an extended period of time. Thehouse in which he lived in Clarens, and where he composed, among otherthings, 'Le sacre du printemps' and 'Pulcinella', isless than 100 metres up the road from Charasoff's residence. Thispart of Lake Geneva was also a popular retreat for exiledrevolutionaries from Tsarist Russia, and was visited by Pjotr Kropotkin,Michail Bakunin, Wladimir Illjitsch Lenin, Inessa Armand, Vera Fignerand several others. In spring 1908 it appears to have been overcrowdedwith Russians, because Rosa Luxemburg, who regularly spent her springvacation in the guest-house 'La Colline' in Baugy-sur-Clarens,wrote to Karl and Luise Kautsky in April 1908: 'The entireguest-house, and all of Baugy, Vevey, Clarens, and Lausanne is full ofRussians. We are the only ones here to speak some German' (KautskyPapers, International Institute of Social History, Amsterdam; quotedfrom Huser 2003: 83).

From Clarens, Charasoff sent two letters to Karl Kautsky, whichhave been preserved in the Kautsky archive. The first one, dated 18February 1909, was an accompanying letter to a complimentary copy of his1909 book, which he sent Kautsky together with 'a short article inwhich I have developed the same ideas in a different and, as it seems tome, less popular, but for the adept of Marx's theory clearerform'. He added: 'I would of course be delighted if you wereto publish this article in your journal, but this must of course dependon your judgement'. Just one week later, on 25 February 1909,Charasoff responded to Kautsky's rejection letter and return of themanuscript, which he had received the day before, in the followingterms:

I readily admit that my assessment of Marxism may contain someimprecisions. Because I am not a Marxist in the conventional sense ofthe term, it is impossible for me to think myself into this doctrine,which is really alien to my way of thinking, however much I esteem Marxas a political economist and as a theoretician of the labourmovement.... But that my construction should be fundamentally wrong I amnot ready to concede so easily, and 1 therefore look forward to yourpromised statement of grounds, by letter or in print, with greatinterest. (Charasoff to Kautsky, 18 and 25 February 1909, KautskyPapers, D VII 67-8, International Institute of Social History,Amsterdam).

During his stay in Clarens Charasoff took residence in rue de laGare 11 (now rue Gambetta), which is located right next to the trainstation, with direct connections to Montreux and Lausanne. Just up thehill within walking distance is the small village of Baugy-sur-Clarens,where several Russian exiles lived, including Nicolai Rubakin, whosefamous library was thus at Charasoff's disposal. (20) A furtherreason for Charasoff's choice of Clarens as a temporary residence,apart from its natural beauty and its closeness to the Russian communityin Baugy, may have been the fact that Leon Walras was living there(until his death in January 1910). Moreover, Lausanne was near andeasily accessible, where in 1909 Vilfredo Pareto was still teaching. Inview of Charasoff's statement (in the Preface of his book of 1910)that he planned to write a third book on the critique of the marginalistapproach to economic theory, the idea is close at hand that he may havetried to get in touch with Walras and Pareto--but so far no evidence hasbeen found in support of this hypothesis. (It should also be noted thatin spring 1909 Leon Walras was presumably already too ill for a seriousscientific discussion.)

In August 1909, Charasoff moved with his family from Clarens toLausanne, and took up residence in Avenue de la Harpe 3, until the endof March 1910. There is no evidence for any connection with theUniversity of Lausanne: Charasoff was neither enrolled as a regularstudent nor as an auditor. He also seems not to have used the Universitylibrary, although this cannot be ascertained definitively, because thelibrary loan documents are incomplete. (21) It seems most likely thatCharasoff used his 'sabbatical term' in Clarens and Lausannemainly for composing the book manuscript of his major economic work, DasSystem des Marxismus, the preface of which is dated 'Lausanne, 24December 1909'.

Marriage with Marie Kriegshaber

Some two months earlier, on 28 October 1909, Georg von Charasoffmarried Marie Kriegshaber (in some documents: Krigsgaber), who gavebirth to a son, Sergius, on 11 March 1910 in Lausanne (Geburtseintrag,Stadtarchiv Lausanne). Marie Kriegshaber was born on 1 August 1882 inKamenetz-Podolski/Proskurow (then Russia, now Ukraine). After receivinga high school education at the Jewish 'Schitomir' gymnasiumfor girls in her home town, Marie Kriegshaber studied medicine at theUniversity of Berne from the winter term 1902-03 until the end of thewinter term 1903-04. (22) In the summer term 1904 she transferred fromBeme to Zurich, where she finished her medical studies in 1908 with adoctoral dissertation (Kriegshaber 1908). (23) The list of courses sheattended and the topic of her dissertation suggest that she specialisedin gynaecology. Interestingly, the account books for lecture fees showthat she also attended the course 'Psychiatrische Klinik' byProfessor Bleuler in the summer term 1907 (Kollegiengeldabrechnungen derUniversitat Zurich fur das Jahr 1907, Staatsarchiv Zurich).

7 On the Reception to Charasoff's Contributions

It has rightly been suggested that Charasoff's pioneeringcontributions were not appreciated at the time because most contemporaryeconomists lacked the necessary mathematical training for a properunderstanding of his work (Mori 2007). In addition, two further reasonscan be given for the almost complete neglect of Charasoff's twobooks. First, Charasoff's choice of the publisher was not veryfortunate: The Hans Bondy Verlagsbuchhandlung in Berlin only existedfrom 1908 to 1913, (24) its programme consisted predominantly ofliterary titles, and the print-run was low, so that only very few copiesof the two books are extant today. Secondly, Charasoff's ratherpolemical style not only offended readers, but also turned theirattention away from his original ideas and novel analytical concepts.This can be exemplified with regard to three contemporary book reviews.(25)

Charasoff's first book was reviewed by Otto Bauer in the Mayissue 1909 of the journal Der Kampf (Bauer 1908-09a). According toBauer, Charasoff rightly pointed out that a central element ofMarx's theoretical system is the idea that capitalism fails todevelop the productivity of labour to the highest possible degree,'because the introduction of labour-saving methods of production ishindered by the fact that the capitalist only pays for necessary labour,but not for surplus labour' (1908-09a: 380). However, 'thiscorrect idea is presented by Charasoff in the clumsiest possibleway', so that Marx's important idea 'is distorted by hisunfortunate style of presentation to the point of making it appearridiculous' (190809a: 380-81). Bauer's rather superficialreview makes no mention at all of Charasoff's analysis of pricesand distribution. This prompted Charasoff to send a reply to Bauer,which the latter refused to publish. Instead, he provided a summaryaccount of Charasoff's reply in a single paragraph of the Julyissue of Der Kampf. In this short paragraph Bauer merely reported that'Charasoff complains about the fact that my review did not discusshis solution of the contradiction between the first and the third volumeof Capital and his analysis of the relationship between the law of thefalling rate of profit and the crisis theory' (1908-09b: 480).

Charasoff's second book, Das System des Marxismus, wasreviewed somewhat more extensively by Bauer in the March 1910 issue ofDer Kampf Bauer conceded that Marx's transformation algorithm was'incomplete', because Marx had 'refrained from showinghow the formation of the prices of production must then in turn modifythe rate of profit'. But this 'gap' cannot be filled'by simply setting the prices of the basic products [Grundprodukte]equal to their values, and by thus falling back into the errors of thephysiocrats. The value of the commodity exceeds the value of labourpower also in the surplus production ['Mehrproduktion', whichis the term used by Bauer for Charasoff's term'Nebenproduktion'], and this surplus value is also distributedamong all capitals according to their size' (1910-11: 237).Bauer's objection clearly missed the point of Charasoff'sprocedure, which was to prove the incompatibility of Marx's twoinvariance postulates ('sum of values = sum of prices' and'total surplus value = total profits'). Bauer also failed tounderstand Charasoff's proof of the determination of the generalrate of profits in the basic industries alone. (For a more detaileddiscussion of Bauer's review, see Mori 2007.)

Das System des Marxismus was reviewed also by Conrad Schmidt inSozialistische Monatshefte, which was the revisionist counterpart ofKautsky's Die neue Zeit, the theoretical journal of the GermanSocial Democrats. Schmidt's review opened with a complaint aboutCharasoff's 'tricky sophistry' (verzwickte Rabulistik),which 'demands very hard work from the serious reader' (1910:850). Schmidt then contended that Charasoff's book 'contains adamnation [Strafgericht] of my article "Grundriss zu einem Systemder theoretischen Nationalokonomie" (published in theSozialistische Monatshefte)' (cf. Schmidt 1909). Charasoff hadindeed criticised this article briefly in the Preface of his book. Theremainder of Schmidt's book review is devoted to a defence of hisown position on Marx's theory of value. In the quoted article,Schmidt had argued that the labour theory of value should be abandonedaltogether, and had also contended--without showing it --that ananalysis in terms of production prices suffices for a derivation of allthe important Marxian ideas, while at the same time avoiding the errorsand contradictions into which one is inevitably led by a furtheradherence to the labour theory of value.

A third 'review' of Charasoff's 1909 book appearedin Vorwarts, in the section 'Literarische Rundschau', of 21February 1909. All that the reviewer, Gustav Eckstein, had to say aboutCharasoff's book is contained in the following passage:

If one wanted to note all the nonsense which is in this book, onewould have to transcribe it; if one wanted to set it right, one wouldhave to expound the entire economic system of Karl Marx. There is hardlyany notion in Marx's theory which Mr. Charasoff has notmisunderstood, hardly any doctrine which he has not distorted. (Eckstein1909)

No grounds are provided for this judgement.

8 Charasoff as a Student of 'Oeconomia Publica' at theUniversity of Zurich

In September 1910, Charasoff returned to Zurich with his new wifeand four children and took residence in Plattenstrasse 28; in thefollowing year the family then moved to larger premises inOttikerstrasse 14 in Zurich-Oberstrass. (26) In October 1910 Charasoffenrolled as a student at the Law Faculty of the University of Zurich,with 'Oeconomia publica' as his main field of study. Theaccount books for lecture fees show that from the winter term 1910-11until the end of the winter term 1911-12 he attended all the lecturesand seminars that are required for a degree in economics. In the summerterm 1912 the account books show no entries for lecture fees any more,although Charasoff was still enrolled as a regular student. Heapparently terminated his studies at the end of the winter term 1911-12,without passing a final examination and without de-registering. Theavailable documents suggest that Charasoff had embarked on this studywith the intention of obtaining a degree in economics, and that heworked seriously towards achieving this goal for three semesters.

Political economy in Zurich

Until the last quarter of the nineteenth century political economywas taught at the University of Zurich by professors in the Law facultyas a minor subject. It was only with Julius Wolf, who taught in Zurichfrom 1888 to 1897, that political economy became a separate field ofstudy. (27) Wolfs successor in Zurich was Heinrich Herkner, who taughttheoretical and applied economics as well as public economics andstatistics from 1898 to 1906. Herkner was in turn succeeded in 1907 bythe economic historian Heinrich Sieveking, who taught in Zurich untilhis return to his home-town Hamburg in 1922. (28) The second economicsprofessor was Joseph Esslen, a pupil of Lujo Brentano, who taught inZurich as an extra-ordinary professor from 1906-12 and as a fullprofessor from 1913-14, when he left for Berlin. From 1913 onwards,Sieveking's co-worker was Manuel Saitzew, an economic historian andhistorian of economic thought, who succeeded him as a full professor in1922 (see Gagliardi et al. 1938: 831-6).

If Charasoff had embarked on the study of 'Oeconomiapublica' in order to find economic theorists with whom he coulddiscuss his ideas on Marx's economic theory, then his hopes wereprobably disappointed. Sieveking and Esslen, from their training andtheir research interests, presumably were unable to understand Charasoffs contributions. It is very likely, however, that in Sieveking'sseminars Charasoff came into contact with fellow students with a deepinterest in Marx's economic theories. In his autobiographicalreminiscences Sieveking noted about his teaching in Zurich (withoutgiving a precise date): 'Apart from the lecture course I also helda regular seminar, which turned out to be rather lively, because it wasnot only attended by the calm and quiet Swiss-men but also by manyRussians, who were still agitated by the revolution of 1905' (1977:96-7). In all likelihood, Charasoff also came in contact with NatalieMoszkowska, who wrote her doctoral dissertation under Sieveking'ssupervision during this period. (29) In her later book Das MarxscheSystem. Ein Beitrag zu dessen Ausbau (1929), Moszkowska provided notonly a critical discussion of Tugan-Baranovsky's andBortkiewicz's contributions to the transformation problem, but alsodiscussed Tugan-Baranovsky's, Luxemburg's and Charasoff scontributions to the critique of Marx's crisis theory.

In all probability, the reason for Charasoff s abrupt terminationof his studies in spring 1912 lies in a tragic personal event. Hissecond wife, Marie von Charasoff, nee Kriegshaber, 'poisonedherself with cyanide' (Vormundschaftakten 'Kinder Charasoff,Stadtarchiv Zurich). From the available documents it is not possible toascertain whether she poisoned herself accidentally (as a doctor ofmedicine, she might well have experimented with poisonous substances forprofessional reasons) or rather committed suicide (which seems morelikely). In any case, Georg Charasoff was suddenly left behind with fourchildren, with the youngest one, Sergius, barely two years old. Heappears to have coped with this difficult situation by giving up hiseconomic studies. He stayed on in Zurich-Oberstrass in Ottikerstrasse 14with his four children until February 1915.

9 Charasoff s Entry for Robert Michels's Handwoterbuch project

In late 1913 Charasoff was invited by Robert Michels, who hadmeanwhile become a professor of sociology at the University of Torino,to make a contribution to a projected encyclopaedia of sociology, to beentitled Handworterbuch der Soziologie. In a letter to Michels of 15January 1914, which is preserved in the Roberto Michels Papers at theFondazione Einaudi in Torino, Charasoff explained his ideas for anarticle on 'Tolstoy' which he intended to contribute. Hepointed out that he would challenge the prevailing view of Tolstoy as athinker who stands in the tradition of Jean-Jacques Rousseau. He assuredMichels that he was perfectly aware of the novelty and heretical natureof his views, which ran counter to dominant readings of Tolstoy'sphilosophical position, but that he felt capable of arguing out his case('if sufficient space were available to me'), because he hadthoroughly studied this thinker for many years'. Interestingly,Charasoff ended his letter with the remark:

I would also have liked to contribute something on Marxism, but inthis field I am a heretic as well and I do not want to impose my ideason others. If you should be familiar with my book Das System desMarxismus, you would perhaps let me know which entries in this boundaryfield in between sociology and economics you consider to be worthy of mylabour. (Roberto Michels Papers, Fondazione Einaudi, Torino)

This remark shows that Charasoff still entertained some hopes in1914 that he could bring his ideas on the Marxian theory of value anddistribution to the attention of a larger academic audience. With thecollapse of Michels's Handworterbuch project (for which, besidesthe outbreak of World War I, also Max Weber's and FerdinandTonnies's refusals of contributing major entries was responsible),a further attempt of Charasoff to gain some recognition for his work ineconomic theory collapsed as well.

10 CharasofFs Departure from Zurich and Return to Tbilisi

In February 1915 Georg Charasoff travelled to Tbilisi 'inorder to take care of some financial or legal transactions related tohis property' (Vormundschaftsakten 'Kinder Charasoff,Stadtarchiv Zurich), leaving his four children behind in Zurich underthe auspices of Dr Max Husmann, the owner of a private high school and aclose friend of the Charasoff family. (30) On 1 May 1915 Husmanndisbanded the apartment in Ottikerstrasse 14, after Charasoff hadinformed him by telegram that for the time being he could not possiblyreturn. The four children were lodged separately in different familiesin Zurich, mostly of Russian-Jewish origin, with Dr Husmann inguardianship of all four children. In the following three years nofurther letters or telegrams from Georg Charasoff arrived, and it wasnot even clear whether he was still alive. In the revolutionary andpost-revolutionary turmoil of 1917 it was rather difficult to obtain anyinformation at all on the situation in Georgia.

Some information about an event that may or may not be related toCharasoff s sudden departure from Zurich emerges from a document in theStaatsarchiv Zurich, which concerns a court decision from the districtcourt Zurich of 24 March 1915 (Urteil des Bezirksgerichts Zurich vom 24.Marz 1915, 'Charasoff, Staatsarchiv Zurich). Apparently, Charasoffhad sacked a housemaid in December 1914 without giving any grounds. Sheapplied to the local judge, who decided that her outstanding wage was tobe paid to her. Charasoff did not accept this decision and applied tothe next higher court, the 'Bezirksgericht'. In the courthearing on 24 March (which Charasoff did not attend) it transpired thathe had approached the housemaid sexually, and had apparently sacked herfor refusing him. Moreover, the housemaid's description of him asan extremely arrogant and self-assured but also uncontrolled andill-tempered person was confirmed by several witnesses. The courtsentenced Charasoff (in absentia) to make the outstanding wage paymentand to cover the law costs.

For a full four years, Husmann took care of the Charasoff children.In spring 1919 he then applied for resolution of his guardianship,because he had run into serious financial problems with his privateschool. Moreover, he also had disciplinary problems with the three elderchildren. According to Husmann, Charasoff had left him some 6,000 SwissFrancs in February 1915, and approximately the same amount of money hehad obtained from disbanding the Charasoff apartment (that is, from thesale of furniture, houseware, carpets and so on), and from theliquidation of Charasoff s share in his private school. But over andabove this sum, Dr Husmann declared to have spent out of his own pocket,from 1915 to 1919, 'some 12.000 to 15.000 Swiss Francs' (31)on the Charasoff children, 'apart from much time and distress. Mybenevolence has been shamelessly exploited' (Vormundschaftsakten'Kinder Charasoff, Stadtarchiv Zurich).

In early 1919 the municipality of Zurich assumed the guardianshipof the four Charasoff children, in the form of its representative DrHaberli (Amtsvormund). From spring 1919 to spring 1920, there exists anextensive documentation with regard to Dr Haberli's activitiesconcerning the Charasoff children (see Vormundschaftsakten 'KinderCharasoff and Fremdenpolizeidossier 'Kinder Charasoff, StadtarchivZurich), which can be briefly summed up as follows. By spring 1919,Charasoff s son Arthur, then 17 years old, regularly bunked school inorder to hang out with his Russian friends in Zurich; he stayed up lateand strolled through Zurich's nightlife, incurred debts, and wasarrested by the police more than once. There were plans of confining himto a workhouse for boys in the Swiss countryside, but he left Zurich inMay 1919 without giving notice to anybody with one of the 'Russiantrains' (Russenzuge), which regularly departed from Zurich in thoseyears. After a journey of several weeks he arrived in Tbilisi, brieflystayed with his father, and then moved on to Batum, where he worked forthe British army.

Lily von Charasoff, then 15 years old, also failed to attendclasses regularly in the private school for girls in which she had beenplaced by her father. She was apparently fascinated by the theatre, theballet and the opera, moved in artistic and literary circles, and alsohad first love affairs. She informed Dr Haberli that she intended togive up high school attendance in order to become an actress, and sheactually took acting lessons. In spring and summer 1919 Lily obtainedregular financial support from Edith Rockefeller-McCormick, the motherof her schoolmate and close girlfriend Muriel McCormick. (32) Dr Haberlinoted in a memo note that Mrs Rockefeller-McCormick, then one of therichest women in the world, was even prepared to employ her as alady's companion and secretary, but Lily refused this offer anddeclared that she was determined to travel to Tbilisi in order to searchfor her father.

Alexander von Charasoff had successfully finished high school in1918 and then had become a student of chemistry at the University ofZurich. However, after a few months he had largely given up studying andspent his time by enjoying the Zurich nightlife and incurring debts.Only the youngest child, Sergius, then eight years old, caused nodisciplinary problems.

Since the municipality of Zurich was keen to get rid of thefinancial obligations related to the three remaining children, DrHaberli tried to raise money for their 'home transport'. Fromvarious sources, including donations from Mrs McCormick and from afurther school friend or teacher of Lily's by the name of MariaWyss, a sufficient amount was finally available for covering Lily'stravel costs. She left Zurich on 21 October 1919 and travelled by trainand ship via Naples and Constantinople to Tbilisi, where she arrivedsome six weeks later. Immediately upon her arrival she wrote a letter toDr Haberli, and another one to her step-brother Alexander, in which sheasked him forcefully not to embark on the journey to Tbilisi, and ratherto make every possible effort to be allowed to stay on in Zurich.

She informed Alexander about the difficult living conditions inTbilisi, where their father now earned his living as a professor at thePolytechnical University: 'We don't have any money, althoughwe still own a factory, but this is out of use and earns us no money.And to sell it now is not the right time'. In a letter to DrHaberli Lily noted that her father, with whom she was living together ina single, unheated room, 'has lost all his property, which is nowin the hands of the Russian government'. Since life was sodifficult in Tbilisi, her plan was to return to Zurich as soon aspossible, together with her father:

We plan to come to Switzerland in spring, and if Alexander couldstay on until then, this would be a great relief. Here it would be verydifficult for him, and his future would be rather bleak, the more so,because he cannot speak the language. (Lily Charasoff to Dr Haberli, 8December 1919; Vormundschaftsakten 'Kinder Charasoff, StadtarchivZurich)

However, when Lily's two letters arrived in Zurich on 27December 1919, Alexander had already embarked on the 'hometransport' to Tbilisi, together with his younger brother. They hadleft Zurich on 9 December 1919.

In June 1920 Lily again informed Dr Haberli about her firmintention to return to Zurich, together with her father and her youngestbrother. She had meanwhile opened a sewing room and hoped to earn enoughmoney within the next fifteen months to make a return trip possible:

Life is very difficult here. There is an enormous inflation andmuch suffering. My father is very weak. My brother Arthur has got anexcellent job in Baku. Bubi [that is, Sergius] lives with Papa and isdoing well on the whole. (Vormundschaftsakten 'Kinder Charasoff,Stadtarchiv Zurich)

Neither Georg von Charasoff nor his children ever returned toZurich.

11 CharasofPs Articles in Die Aktion and Der Gegner

In 1918, five essays by Georg Charasoff appeared in theliterary-political journal Die Aktion (Charasoff 1918a-e). Scrutinyshows that these articles are but slightly revised versions of fivechapters from Charasoff s second book, Das System des Marxismus, of1910. The texts were probably reprinted without the author's (andthe publisher's) consent: Charasoff lived in Tbilisi from 1915 andthe Hans Bondy Verlag had been liquidated already in 1913. In 1920, fourchapters of Charasoff s 1909 book, including the final polemicalchapter, were published in Die Aktion, in three instalments and underthe new heading 'Eine Darstellung der Lehre von Karl Marx' (AnExposition of Karl Marx's Theory) (Charasoff 1920).

Die Aktion was a literary-political journal, edited by FranzPfemfert, which appeared from 1911 to 1932. It was instrumental for thebreakthrough of expressionism in Germany (see Raabe 1961, 1964). In theearly phase of the expressionist movement, that is, from roughly 1911 to1914, Die Aktion was the main outlet, together with HerwarthWalden's Der Sturm, for the new literary and artistic movement.Very early on, Pfemfert published the works of young writers and poetsthat would later become world famous, including Gottfried Benn, MaxBrod, Andre Gide, Georg Heym, Else Lasker-Schuler, Heinrich Mann, FrankWedekind, Franz Werfel and Carl Zuckmayer. Die Aktion also publishedillustrations by artists like Lyonel Feininger, George Grosz, FranzMarc, Henri Matisse, Pablo Picasso and Egon Schiele. In addition toillustrations, literary texts, and expressionist poetry, the journalalso published political-economic essays with asocialist/Marxist/anarchist orientation. In 1918, Pfemfert brieflysupported the 'Rate-Kommunismus' and after the foundation ofthe German Communist Party (KJPD) his journal temporarily became theofficial party journal. Charasoff s texts had presumably beenrecommended to Pfemfert by his friend Otto Buek.

In 1921, the literary-political journal Der Gegner, which wasedited by Julian Gumperz and Wieland Herzfelde, published the article'Karl Marx an seine burgerlichen Gegner' (Karl Marx to hisbourgeois adversaries) by Georg Charasoff (1921). This was a slightlyrevised version of the final chapter of Charasoffs book of 1909, whichhad been re-published also in Die Aktion (Charasoff 1920 (10): col.634-9). The editors of Der Gegner supported the Bolshevist revolution inRussia and published a number of articles which glorified the 'newlife' in the Soviet Union. Ironically, at this very time GeorgCharasoff was suffering from hunger and cold in Tbilisi, which had justbeen occupied by the Red Army.

12 Charasoffs Intellectual Preoccupations in Tbilisi, Baku andMoscow: 1917-31

In 1917, after the collapse of the Russian empire, Georgia became apart of the 'Transcaucasian Federation'. Upon thelatter's break-up, the Democratic Republic of Georgia was foundedin May 1918 under the leadership of the Menshevik party. In order toprevent Georgia from being occupied by the Ottoman empire, the NationalAssembly signed a treaty with Germany, which recognised the newlyfounded Republic and stationed troops there, in compensation for theestablishment of an anti-Bolshevist region between the Ukraine and theCaspian Sea. After Germany's defeat, the German troops were removedfrom the Caucasus and replaced by British troops. The Mensheviksintroduced a land reform, in which the feudal landlords wereexpropriated (without compensation) and their land was divided upamongst the peasant farmers as private property. Forests, mineraldeposits, the railway system and harbour installations were seized bythe government as state property. The Mensheviks also introduced a neweducational system, with Georgian as the official language in primaryschools and gymnasiums as well as in the newly founded NationalUniversity in Tbilisi. In March 1921, after the occupation of Georgia bythe Red Army, the leading Social Democrats left the country andestablished a government in exile in Paris, under the leadership of NoeZhordania. Georgia saw violent riots in August and September 1924,followed by executions of some 4000 people. (33)

Futurism, transrational poetry, and psychoanalyticalinterpretations of literature

In the post-revolutionary turmoil in Russia a very interestingartistic and intellectual life developed in Tbilisi, which was at itsheight after Georgia's declaration of independence in spring 1918:

In 1917-1921 Tbilisi actually played the same role in Caucasus asParis in Europe in the beginning of the century; in other words, itbecame the cultural centre of Russia and Caucasus, where the eliteartistic society gathered and its accumulated artistic energy was beingcreatively expressed at full strength. (Chikharadze 2009)

In 1917-18 many young poets, artists, actors, ballet-dancers andintellectuals from Russia moved to Tbilisi, where they organisedreadings and discussions of modern poetry, as well as cabaret and balletperformances in coffee-houses and taverns. A popular place was the'Fantastic Little Inn' (Fantasticheskii kabachok), which wasopened in November 1917 on the main street of the Georgian capital andsoon became a major centre of attraction for young poets and artists.The Georgian poet G. Robakidse described it thus:

Tbilisi had become a fantastic city. This fantastic city needed afantastic comer and one fine day at Rustaveli Prospect No. 12, in thecourtyard, poets and artists opened The Fantastic Little Inn, whichconsisted of a small room designed for 12-15 people in which by somemiracle as many as 50 people managed to fit in. The walls of the roomwere decorated with phantasmagoria. The Inn was open almost everyevening and writers and artists read their poems and lectures.(Nikolskaia 1998: 167)

Georg Charasoff seems to have participated very actively in theseartistic-literary activities right from the start. Marzio Marzaduri, anItalian expert on Russian avant-garde literature of the early twentiethcentury, refers to him in the following terms:

Charazov is indeed an intellectual of great versatility: he workson mathematics, economics, psychology and literature, also writespoetry. Fie has returned to his mother country from Zurich, where he hadlived for many years, and is regarded by everyone as a sort of master[maestro]. In April 1918 he organized a conference in the'Fantastic Little Inn' on The theory of Freud andtransrational language, then published in 'Ars' apsychoanalytical interpretation of the dream of Tatiana, the heroine ofOnegin-, the first work with a Freudian reading of a poetic text inRussia. (Marzaduri 1982: 117)

Gerald Janecek, the author of a book on Zaum: The TransrationalPoetry of Russian Futurism (1996), refers to Charasoff in the followingterms:

The Tiflis mathematician and poet G. A. Kharazov was an activeproponent of Freudian psychology. Although Kharazov was apparently ableto read Freud in the original German judging by one such reference byhim (1919a: 12), the main Freud texts were already available in Russiantranslation: The Interpretation of Dreams in 1904, The Psychopathologyof Everyday Life in 1910 and a second edition in 1916. Among therecorded contributions of Dr Kharazov to the discussion of Freud andzaum were a lecture, 'Freud's Theories and Zaum poetry',at the Fantastic Little Inn, April 5, 1918, and his participation in adebate 'On Theatre and Zaum poetry' at the Conservatory, May27, 1918, in which Kruchenykh also took part. (Janecek 1996: 242)

Aleksei Kruchenykh is one of the best-known Russian avant-garde andZaum poets, together with Jurii Degen, David Burliuk, Sergei Goredetskiiand Velimir Khlebnikov (among Georgian poets, Igor Terentyev and IlyaZdanevich are famously remembered). There were several literary groupsin Tbilisi, named 'Alpha-Lira', 'The Blue Horns','410', 'The Guild of Poets', 'The Academy ofVerse', which was founded and led by Charasoff, and the'Syndicate of the Futurists', amongst others. Various literarystyles, which shifted and developed, from futurism, expressionism andDadaism to Zaum or transrational poetry were explored (for summaryaccounts, see Markov 1968, Margarotto 1982, and Nikolskaia 2000; for anautobiographical account, see Kruchenykh 1995). In her contribution toDada global, a book that traces the dissemination of the Dada-movementin Eastern Europe, Ludmila Vachtova (1994: 110) contended that Charasoffhad been instrumental in transferring Dadaism from Zurich to Tbilisi.However, this is not plausible, because Charasoff had left Zurich inFebruary 1915, while Dada performances in the 'CabaretVoltaire' were held only from March 1916 onwards (and there arealso no hints for earlier contacts between Charasoff and Hugo Ball, HansArp or other members of the artistic community that were laterassociated with the 'Cabaret Voltaire').

As already mentioned, one of Charasoff s presentations in theFantastic Little Inn led to the publication of the article 'SonTat'iany (Opyt tolkovaniia po Freidu)' [Tatiana's dream(A Freudian interpretation)] in the newly founded literary journal ARS(Kharazov 1919a), which also published a transrational poem titled'Fuga [poem]' by him (1919b). It concerns the interpretationof a dream sequence of the main female character, Tatiana, inPushkin's famous poetic epos Evgenij Onegin. Charasoff sinterpretation, according to which Tatiana's dream is a nightmarishmirror-like doubling of Onegin's obsessions, is frequentlymentioned with approval in contributions on Russian avant-gardeliterature. (34) According to Harsha Ram (2004: 374), Charasoff sarticle was instrumental in turning Aleksei Kruchenykh's attentionto psychoanalysis and in introducing Freudian ideas into Zaum poetry:(35)

It was in Tbilisi that Kruchenykh was to assimilate the lessons ofFreud, specifically The Interpretation of Dreams and The Psychopathologyof Everyday Life; it was also in Tbilisi that the first attempt was madeto apply Freudian theory to the interpretation of Russian literature....Kruchenykh found in Freud a new means of interpreting the randomness ofphonetic play. If the mystical and the infantile had long been claimedas analogues to avant-garde linguistic practice, they were now joined bythe erotic and the obscene.

Facsimile reproductions and English translations of fivetransrational poems by Georg Charasoff, which he wrote in 1917 and 1919into Sudeikin's album, as well as some further information on hisliterary activities, can be found in the magnificent Salon Album of VeraSudeikin-Stravinsky, which was edited by John E. Bowlt (1995: 35, 36, 41and 42). (36) According to Bowlt (1995: 35), an entry in VeraSudeikin's diary shows 'that Kharazov also interpretedVera's dreams according to the principles of Freud (Diaries, 6 May1919)'.

In the winter of 1919-20 many poets left Tbilisi because of thedeteriorating economic conditions in Georgia. The Menshevik governmenthad difficulties with controlling corruption and with raising taxes, andeven the Head of State, Noe Zhordania, admitted that the economic andsocial conditions were unbearable. Many of the Russian poets moved fromTbilisi to Baku (Azerbaijan) where the newly founded University had justopened. Charasoff stayed on until spring 1921 and continued toparticipate actively in the literary activities in Tbilisi. The poetessMelitta Rafalovich, the wife of the leader of the 'Guild ofPoets', recalled the meetings in the winter 1920-21:

We met once a week, read and discussed sixty poems an evening ...about fifty men and women ... half sang half read their verse ... Lifewas getting very difficult. Rooms were requisitioned. It wasunprecedentedly cold in Tiflis, but the Guild still went on meeting.Wrapped up in their coats, people huddled around the miserable stoves,reading poetry. The electricity went out every minute, but even if itwas on, you could not read by it. Paraffin lamps, which smoked,appeared. Cold and hunger stopped this activity. (Nikolskaia 1980:320)

Charasoff not only participated in those meetings but also ledanother group of writers, the so-called 'Academy of Verse':

Apart from the sessions of the Guild of Poets, in 1920 in Tiflis aliterary circle called the Academy of Verse, headed by Kharazov, wasalso functioning. Apart from readings of poetry at its meetings therewere lectures devoted to analysing literary works from a psychoanalyticpoint of view.... Not only Kharazov, but also Terentiev, the poetess K.Arsenieva, Tatishvili and the author of prose miniatures, Shepelenko,were active visitors to the Academy of Verse. (Nikolskaia 1980: 320)

From 1919 to 1921 Charasoff earned his living as a professor ofmathematics at the Polytechnical University in Tbilisi. According toMarzaduri, 'Kharazov left Tbilisi in 1921 and moved to Baku, inorder to teach political economics at the newly-founded University. InBaku, he continued to work on literature and psychoanalysis, to writepoetry and to study Pushkin's works' (Marzaduri 1982: 127).This is also confirmed in the reminiscences of Mosei Altman (1990), apoet and literary critic, who notes that from 1921 to 1924 Charasofflectured on mathematics, physics and political economy in Baku. Altmanalso referred to two books that were published by the University of Bakuin 1922 and 1924, and which summarise Charasoff s lectures on politicaleconomy. The 1924 book, of which a copy has been found, is entitledIntroduction to Theoretical Political Economy (Kharazov 1924); it wascompiled with the help of students from Charasoffs lectures on politicaleconomy that he gave in Baku in 1923-24. (37) An assessment of thecontent of Charasoff s 1924 book with his 'Baku lectures'requires a separate paper.

Charasoffs contributions to debates in physics and psychoanalysis

In 1925, Charasoff gave several lectures in Moscow and alsopublished a short article in the journal of the Communist Academy whichaimed at a mathematical refutation of Einstein's relativity theory(Kharazov 1925a). (38) On the basis of this article Charasoff has beenassociated with the so-called 'mechanist group', whoseobjections to relativity theory triggered heated debates in Russiaduring the 1920s (Plyutto 1998: 78; Tikka 2008: 187). The debates in the1920s among Russian physicists on relativity theory were burdened withpolitical and ideological considerations, and articulating a particularview which did not become the official Party line could havefar-reaching practical consequences for those involved:

The engineers with a bias to mechanistic thinking (N P Kastarin, YaI Grdina, G A Kharazov, later V F Mitkevich and others) went muchfurther in their criticism of relativity than the Deborin group did....Bringing academic discussions on the relation of philosophy to physicsdown to the level of admonitions on the adherence of science, CommunistParty principles, the class struggle in science, sabotage of scientists,etc. was fraught with a ban on teaching the physical theories tostudents and with the persecution of theoretical physicists. (Vizgin1999: 1261)

According to Klyukin, the physicist Timiryazev, a main proponent ofthe group of mechanistic thinkers, referred to Charasoff in hisIntroduction to Theoretical Physics (1933, in Russian) in the followingterms: 'An ingenious and simple derivation of the Einstein-Lorentztransformation ... goes back to the gifted theoretician Professor G AKharazov' (quoted from Klyukin 2008: 335).

In parallel to his work in physics, Charasoff also continued topursue his work on the psychoanalytical interpretation of Russianliterature. In March 1925 he delivered a lecture at the RussianPsychoanalytic Institute in Moscow40 on the interpretation ofPushkin's writings:

The members of the institute also heard addresses by guestspeakers, including one of the rising stars in Soviet psychology, LevVygotsky, on December 14, 1924, and by G.A. Charasov, a literary scholarwho spoke on 'Pushkin's Work in the Light ofPsychoanalysis' on March 21, 1925. (Miller 1998: 67)

In the reports of the meetings of the Russian PsychoanalyticAssociation Charasoff s lecture is summarised in the following terms:

25th meeting.--21 March 1925.

Prof. G. A. Charasow (as guest): Pushkin's work in the lightof psychoanalysis. The speaker analyses several works of Pushkin andnotes some parallels between the social motives in Pushkin'swritings and his psychic attitude. (1926: 125)

In the following week Charasoff presented a further paper:

27th meeting.--28 March 1925.

Prof. G. Charasow (as guest): Methodological considerations on thepsychoanalysis of art. The speaker wants every work of art to beconsidered as a dream of the artist. Every creative act has infantilemotives, which are socially transformed in the further development.(1926: 126)

In the same year Charasoff also attended a symposium on'Psychoanalysis and the Arts' in Moscow, which was organisedby the Russian Academy of Sciences. In a discussion of a contribution byV.M. Friche, Charasoff rejected the latter's objections topsychoanalysis. His comment on Friche was summarised in the followingterms:

What is so scary about someone telling you that a man is a machine,running on some ionic-chemical energy which is also called sexual whendirected to securing progeny? This energy creates all social valuesbecause society is also a kind of progeny. Creation of social values iscalled sublimation, or distillation. But all processes are based on thesame old rough sexual energy. This energy is the matter from whicheverything elevated, social, is made. There is nothing scary and awfulin this, for as everyone knows from long ago, everything emerges frommatter and returns into matter. (Kharazov 1925b: 256-7; quoted fromKurbanovsky 2008: 895) (41)

On the fate of Lily Charasoff

Dmitrii Bykov's celebrated biography of Boris Pasternak (Bykov2005; in Russian) contains an interesting reference to Charasoff sdaughter Lily, in connection with a description of New Year's eveat the turn of the year 1926-27:

Pasternak welcomed the new year 1927 at home, almost in the sameway as described in Nabokov's 'Dar': There,Godunov-Cerdyncev is supposed to meet Zina for the New Year's Eveball, but sits down with his manuscript 'The Life ofCemysevskij' shortly before leaving the house, begins to revise it,allows himself to be carried away, and then writes all night long--Zinareturns home aggrieved, but the thing is finished. Pasternak, as weknow, loved to be alone in the house. In the darkness and privacy of afeast day it was good to sit down on the writing table rather than onthe festive dinner table. Just as you receive it, so you will also liveit: the year 1927 became for Pasternak a year of intensive work andincreasing loneliness. In the first night of the new year he sketchedthe outlines of the second part of 'Smidt, bringing togetherfinished sections and turning them into a unified style. He also was notdisturbed in his working mood by the visit of Lily Charazova shortlyafter midnight. Charazova came in order to congratulate him and thendisappeared, and in the year 1927 she also disappeared from his life andfrom life in general: she contracted typhus and died on 13 September.

Charazova meant a lot to Pasternak - her fate was a particularlycruel one for a woman even in those days. She was bom in 1903. Herfather, Georgij Charazov, lived in Switzerland then, as a politicalemigre ('a gifted scoundrel, mystical anarchist and proven genius,mathematician, poet, anything you like'--is Pasternak'scharacterization of him in a letter to Marina Tsvetayeva. In 1914 heleft his children in Zurich and returned to Georgia, and Lily, when shehad just reached her 15th year, began to search for him in Russia. Abouther Russian exertions very little is known - in the Preface to thefailed anthology of her poems (Charazova wrote in German, under the penname 'Maria Wyss') Pasternak wrote:

 'There she got into an environment that never gave anything else to anyone but disarray and suffering; where she, after having become a mother at the age of seventeen and having been exposed to immorality and suffered endless insults and torments, formed such ideas about life, which guaranteed that any future elation would invariably turn into balefulness for her.' (42)

This environment was, according to Pasternak, inspired by Nietzscheand anarchy: 'The Tbilisi children of the coffee-houseperiod'. Charazova never recollected herself - she forgot Zurichforever, and to Zurich, wrote Pasternak, she must immediately be broughtback, and it was not yet too late--but it did not happen. Pasternakcalled her a beauty, 'Mediumicka', and he loved hercountenance, but her poems he did not really appreciate sometimesreprimanding himself for, perhaps, 'not noticing a great talent,numbed by the soberness and pedantry of his standards': he did notlike in those poems the arbitrariness, the dreamful illustrative qualityand the surrealism of Lautreamont-like shadows, but the roots of allthis lay--not in the attempt to follow the literary fashion, but in thedrowsy, half-sleeping, half-insane state, in which Charazova, foreverdoped by Russia, lived through the revolution, the female tragedy andthrough her entire life.... Charazova first met Pasternak on someevening in spring 1926, perceiving a kindred soul in him, and reachingout for this kinship. He tried to rescue her--but without success: Itwas the environment that fuelled the madness. (Bykov 2005: 94)

In the reminiscences of the poet and literary critic Mosei Altman(1990), one of Georg Charasoff s friends in Baku, Lily is said to havemarried the writer and art critic Aleksandr Georgiyevich Romm(1887-1952). This is confirmed also in Christopher Barnes'sbiography of Boris Pasternak, where it is noted that Lily moved toMoscow in 1922:

where she married the poet Aleksandr Romm. Unable to adjust toSoviet life, she spent her last years in poverty and misery; a member ofthe Union of Poets (SOPO), she wrote only in German and gave an eveningof readings at the Herzen house in March 1926; published translations ofRussians in Die Neue Zeif, five of her lyrics appeared posthumously.(Barnes 1989: 346)

Lily Charasoff s literary remains have been preserved in theRussian State Archive of Literature and Art (RGALI) in Moscow. (43)

Georg von Charasoff's death

The only source of information with regard to Georg von Charasoff sdeath is the following notice in Izvestia of 6 March 1931: 'Thedeath of Professor Kharazov. Kichkas March 5 (by telegram). On the nightof March 5 died suddenly Prof. Georgii Artemovich Kharazov invitedtemporarily to the Energy Institute at the Dnieper' (ibid.: 6).Apparently, Charasoff died on the night of 4 to 5 March 1931 in theKichkas colony near Zaporizhia, a major city in the south-east of theUkraine on the banks of the river Dnieper, when he was visiting theenergy institute Dnjepostro, which since 1927 was overseeing theconstruction of a dam and a hydro-electric power station in the Dnieperriver. Charasoff s eldest son, Alexander, seems to have been killed in1937 during Stalin's great purge. About the fate of Arthur andSergius nothing is known.

Notes

(1) See Egidi and Gilibert (1984, 1989), Duffner and Huth (2013[1987]), Kurz (1989), Kurz and Salvadori (1993, 1995, 2000), Howard andKing (1992), Egidi (1998), Stamatis (1999), Klyukin (2008), Parys (2013,2014), and Mori (2007, 2008, 2011, 2013).

(2) Unless otherwise stated, all translations from German sourcesare mine. The handwritten version of Charasoff s 'Lebenslauf, whichis preserved in the documents of the Faculty of Mathematics and NaturalSciences of the University of Heidelberg (Universitatsarchiv Heidelberg,H-V 3/2), differs slightly from the printed version (cf. Charasoff 1902:68). In particular, it contains the additional information thatCharasoffs parents were members of the Armenian-Gregorian church. Whenhe registered at the University of Heidelberg in 1897, Charasoff alsostated himself to be of the Armenian-Gregorian faith, but in laterdocuments he declared to be 'without confession' (Meldekarte'Charasoff, Georg'; Stadtarchiv Zurich); his children were notbaptised (Vormundschaftsakten 'Kinder Charasoff, StadtarchivZurich).

(3) This date is wrong: Charasoffs oral examination took place on27 February 1902 (cf. Promotionsakten derNaturwissenschaftlich-mathematischen Fakultat, H-V-3/2 fol. 73,Universitatsarchiv Heidelberg).

(4) For a comparative assessment of Charasoffs and Dmitriev'scontributions see Mori (2011).

(5) Georg von Charasoffs first wife, Marie Seldovic, came from aJewish family in Odessa and the Jewish parents of his second wife, MarieKriegshaber, also lived in Odessa after 1906.

(6) The Russian students with whom Max Weber was in close contact,mostly after 1901-02, were Bogdan Kistjakovskij, Sergej Zivago, FedorStepun, and Aaron Steinberg. Though possible, it seems rather unlikelythat Charasoff had contact with Max Weber, who did not lecture in theperiod from 1897 to 1901.

(7) Michael Reisner (or Reissner, Rejsner, von Reussner) was a lawstudent in Heidelberg in 1897-98. After the October revolution of 1917he became a professor at the law faculty of Petrograd University and wasinvolved in the drafting of the first constitutional law of the SovietUnion. In the 1920s, he worked in the Soviet ministry of Sciences andEducation and was responsible for the foundation of the 'CommunistAcademy' in Moscow, which became a centre for Marxist socialsciences. He was also a founding member of the Russian PsychoanalyticalSociety in Moscow.

(8) One of Konigsberger's best-known students is the Russianmathematician Sof'ja Kovalevskaja (1850-1891), who attended hislectures from 1869 to 1871. She was the first female student at theUniversity of Heidelberg and later was also the first woman ever to beappointed to a professorship in mathematics (in Stockholm).

(9) Letter to the author from Prof. Werner Moritz (ArchivdirektorUniversitatsarchiv Heidelberg), 7 July 2010.

(10) On the history of the 'Marburg school', see Sieg(1994); on the role of the 'Marburg school' in theestablishment of neo-Kantian philosophy in Russia, see Dmitriev (2007).

(11) In 1904-05 Otto Buek, together with the Jewish banker BenediktFriedlander, financed Senna Hoy's anarchistic journal 'Kampf.Zeitschrift fur gesunden Menschenverstand', in which Buek alsopublished an essay on Tolstoy (Buek 1905b).

(12) In an unpublished essay entitled 'The Einstein 1knew', which is in the Einstein-Archive (EA 59-353), Buek noted'that he often provided piano accompaniment for Einstein'sviolin' (Howard 1993: 227).

(13) Further evidence for Buek's friendship with Einsteincomes from a letter of Hermann Cohen to Paul Natorp, dated 28 November1914, which contains the following passage: 'It is very interestingthat Buek is attending Einstein's lectures & comes togetherwith him regularly & discusses thoroughly with him. He finds himunclear philosophically, & still has no clear opinion on the wholething, in which only the difficult mathematics is beyond doubt'(Universitatsbibliothek Marburg, Ms. 831/52; quoted from Holzhey 1986,vol. 2: 436).

(14) Albert Einstein to Emil Szittya, 18 July 1953 (NachlassSzittya, DLA Marbach). Buek obtained regular financial support from the'Einstein fund' for several years.

(15) As an 'Auditor' he was allowed to attend lecturesbut could not take exams.

(16) Eugen Bleuler (1857-1939) was professor of psychiatry at theUniversity of Zurich and the successor to Auguste Forel as director ofthe Psychiatric University clinic 'Burgholzli' from 1898 to1927. Bleuler was the first director of a psychiatric clinic in Europeto adopt the psychoanalytical methods of Sigmund Freud. C.G. Jung, thefounder of analytical psychology, first was an assistant and then acollaborator of Bleuler at the clinic 'Burgholzli' from 1900to 1909. Bleuler is known in particular for his analysis ofschizophrenia (sometimes also designated as 'morbus Bleuler').

(17) Vera Figner (1852-1942) was a leading member of the militantrevolutionary group 'Narodnaya Volya' (Will of the People),which was responsible for the assassination of Tsar Alexander in 1881.In 1894 Figner was sentenced to death, but the death sentence was notcarried out and after her trial she was imprisoned for twenty years atSchlusselburg. In late 1906 she was set free and with the help offriends brought to Switzerland for cure treatment in spring 1907, viaFinland and Sweden. After several years in exile, spent mostly inSwitzerland, she returned to Russia before the revolution.

(18) Otto Veraguth was a well-known psychotherapist in Zurich.

(19) In a letter of 1857, Tolstoy raved about the awesome beauty ofthe unique landscape around Clarens, which had 'blinded' himand had 'moved [him] with unexpected force' (quoted from Huser2003: 82). Twenty-one years later, Tchaikovsky wrote that he could notimagine any landscape outside of Russia 'which more than this oneexerts a comforting influence on the soul' (quoted from Huser 2003:82-3).

(20) The private library of Nicolai Aleksandrovich Rubakincomprised one of the largest collections of Russian books in WesternEurope. At the time of Rubakin's death in 1946 it comprisedapproximately 100,000 volumes. Rubakin freely offered his books toanybody who was interested. Before the Russian revolution of 1917 hislibrary was used inter alia by the bolshevists and menshevists who livedin Baugy, and by guests like Bukharin, Plekhanov, Lenin, and Stravinsky(cf. Senn 1973).

(21) Letter to the author from Francois Allisson, Researcher at theCentre Walras-Pareto at the University of Lausanne, 5 July 2010.

(22) Her younger sister Sophie (bom 15 February 1886) also came toBerne in the winter term 1903-04 and enrolled as a student ofphilosophy.

(23) The supervisor of her doctoral dissertation was ProfessorWyder, the director of the 'Universitatsfrauenklinik' at theUniversity of Zurich.

(24) Hans Bondy (1881-1917) was the son of the Vienneseindustrialist Otto Bondy and his wife Julie, nee Cassirer. His sisterTony was married to Ernst Cassirer (her cousin) and his brother Walterwas a well-known artist, gallery-owner and art critic. Hans Bondy liveda bohemian life in Paris and Berlin; in 1917 he committed suicide. Itcan safely be assumed that Otto Buek was involved in Charasoff s choiceof publisher.

(25) For completeness it should be mentioned that there was also ashort review of Charasoff s book of 1909 by Pierre Moride (1909).

(26) Charasoff s apartment in Plattenstrasse 28 was within walkingdistance (in fact just across the street) from the Institute ofEconomics in Zurichbergstrasse 14.

(27) Although Julius Wolf was strongly opposed to Marxism (see Wolf1892), he attracted a number of revolutionary Marxists as students:'The most talented among them was in his view Rosa Luxemburg'(Gagliardi et al. 1938: 831). Rosa Luxemburg left Zurich in 1897.

(28) Heinrich Sieveking (1871-1945) was bom into a well-knownfamily of Hanseatic merchants and public servants in Hamburg. After hishabilitation in Freiburg he became a professor (Extraordinarius) inMarburg in 1903, before he became a professor of social economics(Ordinarius fur Sozialokonomie) at the University of Zurich, from wherehe moved on to the newly founded University of Hamburg in 1922. He isknown for his work on Italian Renaissance merchant practices and theeconomic history of Hamburg, as well as for his biographies of KarlSieveking and Georg Heinrich Sieveking. In Marburg, Sieveking had closecontacts with Cohen and Natorp, and he kept up the relationship with thetwo neo-Kantian philosophers during his time in Zurich (see Sieveking1977: 85).

(29) The Warsaw-born Natalie Moszkowska (1886-1968) moved to Zurichin 1908 in order to study economics. Her dissertation on workers'savings banks in the Polish coal and steel industry was finished in 1914and published three years later (Moszkowska 1917). For more biographicalinformation, see Howard and King (2000).

(30) Max (Meer) Husmann (1888-1965) came to Zurich around 1900,together with his mother and two brothers and sisters, from Proskurow,Poldonia. In 1906 the medical student Marie Kriegshaber lived with theHusmann family as a tenant in Ilgenstrasse 4. In 1912, Max Husmannfounded a private school in Sonnegstrasse 80, the 'Institut Dr MaxHusmann', with Georg von Charasoff as a silent partner. In 1918,Husmann merged his school with the 'Institut Minerva' inScheuchzerstrasse 2 (which still exists today), and in 1926 he foundedanother private school, the 'Institut Montana' in Zugerberg(which also still exists).

(31) This corresponds roughly to the annual income of a universityprofessor in Switzerland at the time.

(32) Edith Rockefeller-McCormick (1872-1932) was a daughter of theAmerican oil tycoon John D. Rockefeller (Standard Oil); she was marriedto Harold Fowler McCormick, a son of the inventor and entrepreneur CyrusMcCormick (International Harvester). At the time, she was one of therichest women in the world. She first came to Zurich in 1913 in order toobtain treatment from C.G. Jung, and then stayed on until 1921. Duringthose eight years she lived in a luxurious suite in the Hotel Baur auLac, where in 1919 Lily Charasoff for several months visited her on aweekly basis in order to spend the afternoon with her. Her daughterMuriel McCormick (1903-1959) was Lily's schoolmate and closestgirlfriend. After having finished private schools in Zurich andLausanne, Muriel McCormick was trained as an actor and opera-singer, butshe never performed professionally. After the early death of her husbandshe devoted her time and energy to the management of her considerablefunds and to sponsoring the performing and visual arts.

(33) Karl Kautsky, who had rejected Charasoff s submissions to Dieneue Zeit in 1907 and 1909, visited Georgia from September 1920 toJanuary 1921. He was favorably impressed by the reforms that had beenintroduced by the Mensheviks, and wrote a small booklet about his travelimpressions (Kautsky 1921). However, when it was published in May 1921,Georgia had already been occupied by the Red Army (Steenson 1991:227).

(34) See, for instance, Matlaw (1959: 490-91), Rancour-Laferriere(1989: 229-31), Hasty (1999: 258), Clayton (2000: 104) and Gillespie(2009: 463).

(35) According to John E. Bowlt (1995: 35), Charasoffs lecture on'The Theory of Freud and Zaum Poetry', which he delivered on 5April 1918 in the Fantastic Little Inn, 'seems to have impressedboth Alexei Kruchenykh and Igor Terentiev and may have encouraged theirliterary investigations into Zaum poetry'. However, Janecek (1996:212) notes that Kruchenykh's correspondence contains references toFreud already in 1915.

(36) Vera Sudeikin-Stravinsky (1888-1982) was a ballet-dancer,actress and poetess, who travelled with her husband, the artist SergeiSudeikin, during 1917 to 1920, from Moscow to the Ukraine, Georgia, andAzerbaijan. In 1921 she met Igor Stravinsky in Paris and started a loveaffair with him; she then married him in 1940 in the USA.

(37) A copy of the 1924 book has been found in the Rare Bookscollection of the National Library of Russia in St. Petersburg, thanksto the efforts of Nino Parsadanishvili (Tbilisi), who made a thoroughsearch for the book on behalf of the author.

(38) Klyukin (2008: 335) has suggested that Charasoff moved fromBaku to Moscow in 1925, but so far no documents have been found toconfirm this conjecture.

(39) In The Lysenko Affair, published in 1970, the Americanhistorian David Joravsky surmised that Charasoff might have been one ofthe victims of repressive measures against non-conformist scientists:'I consider it very likely that some obscurantists did sufferrepression. For example, G.A. Kharazov vanished with disturbingsuddenness following his "rebuttals" of relativity'(1970: 385). However, there is no evidence to support this hypothesis.

(40) On the history of psychoanalysis in Russia, see Miller (1998).

(41) See also Voronskij (1998: 224).

(42) This passage is from a Preface, entitled 'On LilyCharazova', which Pasternak wrote in 1928 for an anthology of LilyCharasofPs poems, which however did not materialise. The text waspublished posthumously by Elena Pasternak in 1990 in the journalLiteraturnoe obozrenie; see Pasternak (1990 [1928]).

(43) For Lily's five published lyrics, see Charasoff (1928).

References

1. Archive Sources

Archives departementales du Bas-Rhin, Strasbourg (Birth entryAlexander Charasoff)

Deutsches Literaturarchiv (DLA) Marbach (Nachlass Emil Szittya)

Fondazione Luigi Einaudi, Torino (Roberto Michels Papers)

International Institute of Social History, Amsterdam (Karl KautskyPapers)

Russian State Archive of Literature and Art (RGALI), Moscow(Vladimir Chertkov Papers; Lily Kharazova Papers)

Schweizerisches Sozialarchiv (Nachlass Fritz Brupbacher, NachlassNatalie Moszkowska)

Staatsarchiv des Kantons Zurich (Akten der Universitat Zurich)

Staats- und Universitatsbibliothek Gottingen (Nachlass DavidHilbert)

Stadtarchiv Bern (Meldeakten Marie Kriegshaber)

Stadtarchiv Lausanne (Meldeakten Charasoff-Kriegshaber)

Stadtarchiv Montreux (Meldeakten Charasoff-Kriegshaber)

Stadtarchiv Zurich (Meldeakten Charasoff, Vormundschaftsakten'Kinder Charasoff, Fremdenpolizeiakten Charasoff)

Stanford University Library (Andrei Voznesenskii Papers)Universitatsarchiv der Ruprecht-Karls-Universitat Heidelberg(Promotionsakten Charasoff)

2. Published Sources

Altman, M.S. 1990. 'Autobiografia', Minuvshee 10: 205-39.

Barnes, C. 1989. Boris Pasternak. A Literary Biography: 1890-1928.Vol. 1. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Bauer, O. 1908-9a. 'Bucherschau. Marx-Literatur', DerKampf 2 (May 1909): 38081.

Bauer, O. 1908-9b. 'Bucherschau. Marx-Literatur', DerKampf 2 (July 1909): 480.

Bauer, O. 1910-11. 'Bucherschau. Marx-Literatur', DerKampf 4 (February 1911): 237-8.

Birkenmaier, W. 1995. Das russische Heidelberg. Zur Geschichte derdeutschrussischen Beziehungen im 19. Jahrhundert. Heidelberg: DasWunderhom.

Bowlt, J.E. 1995. The Salon Album of VeraSudeikin-Stravinsky.Princeton: Princeton University Press.

Bortkiewicz, L. von. 1906-7. 'Wertrechnung und Preisrechnungim Marxschen System', Archiv fur Sozialwissenschaft undSozialpolitik (in three parts) 23 (1906): 1-50, and 25 (1907): 10-51 and445-88.

Bortkiewicz L. von. 1907. 'Zur Berichtigung der grundlegendentheoretischen Konstruktion von Marx im 3. Band des"Kapital"', Jahrbucher fur Nationalokonomie und Statistik34: 319-35.

Bortkiewicz, L. von. 1952 [1906-7], 'Value and Price in theMarxian System', International Economic Papers 2: 5-60. (Englishtranslation of Parts 2 and 3 of Bortkiewicz, L. v. 1906-7.'Wertrechnung und Preisrechnung im Marxschen System', Archivfur Sozialwissenschaft und Sozialpolitik (in three parts) 23 (1906):1-50, and 25 (1907): 10-51 and 445-88.)

Buek, O. 1904. 'Die Atomistik und Faradays Begriff derMaterie', Archiv Jur die Geschichte der Philosophie 18: 65-110 and139-65.

Buek, O. 1905a. Die Atomistik und Faradays Begriff der Materie.Berlin: Reimer.

Buek, O. 1905b. 'Leo Tolstoi', Kampf. Zeitschrift furgesunden Menschenverstand, 2(19) (24 February 1905): 539-43 and 2 (20)(3 March 1905): 575-9.

Buek, O. 1911. 'Zur Kritik des Marxismus', Die Aktion 1(33) (2 October 1911): col. 1029-33.

Buek, O. 1912. 'Michael Faradays System der Natur und seinebegrifflichen Grundlagen', in H. Cohen (ed.), PhilosophischeAbhandlungen. Hermann Cohen zum siebzigsten Geburtstag dargebracht.Berlin: Cassirer.

Bykov, D. 2005. Boris Pasternak (in Russian). Moscow: Molodaiagvardiia.

Charasoff, G. 1902. Arithmetische Untersuchungen uberIrreduktibilitat. Heidelberg: J. Homing.

Charasoff, G. von. 1909. Karl Marx uber die menschliche undkapitalistische Wirtschaft: eine neue Darstellung seiner Lehre. Berlin:Hans Bondy.

Charasoff, G. 1910. Das System des Marxismus. Darstellung undKritik. Berlin: Hans Bondy.

Charasoff, G. 1918a. 'Die Ideologie des Marxismus', DieAktion 8 (17/18): col. 209-15.

Charasoff, G. 1918b. 'Kritik der Lehre von dem Klassenkampf,Die Aktion 8 (19/20): col. 235-48.

Charasoff, G. 1918c. 'Das Grundgesetz der technischenEntwicklung', Die Aktion 8 (27/28): col. 339-47.

Charasoff, G. 1918d. 'Die Marxsche Preisformef, Die Aktion 8(31/32): col. 395-403.

Charasoff, G. 1918e. 'Die fundamentale Zweiteilung dergesellschaftlichen Produktion', Die Aktion 8 (35/36): col. 446-54.

Charasoff, G. 1920. 'Eine Darstellung der Lehre von KarlMarx', Die Aktion 10 (46/47): col. 634-9, 10 (47/48): col. 657-61,10 (49/50): col. 697-700, and 10 (51/52): col. 707-10.

Charasoff, G. 1921. 'Karl Marx an seine burgerlichen Gegner.Ein hypothetischer Vortrag', Der Gegner 2 (12) (1920/21): 425-32.

Charasoff, L. 1928. 'Und es kommt das Leben ...', Kunstder Zeit. Organ der Kunstler-Selbsthilfe, 2 (5-6): 116. Berlin: Ottens.

Chikharadze, M. 2009. 'Integration/Expansion, Georgian-RussianCultural Relationships in 1910-1980', Speech of Dr Mzia Chikharadzeat the symposium on 'Georgia at the Crossroads of European andAsian Cultures' at the Harriman Institute at Columbia University,New York, NY, May 4, 2009; published in the Georgian Daily on 30 May2009.

Chronik der Stadt Heidelberg (no editor) 1902. Chronik der StadtHeidelberg, vols 8-12. Heidelberg.

Clayton, J.D. 2000. Wave and Stone: Essays on the Poetry and Proseof Alexander Pushkin. Ottawa: Slavic Research Group at the University ofOttawa.

Dmitriev, N.A. 2007. Russischer Kantianismus: Marburg in Russland(in Russian), Moscow: Humanitas.

Dmitriev, V.K. 1974 [1898]. 'The theory of value of DavidRicardo. An attempt at a rigorous analysis' in V.K. Dmitriev 1974.Economic Essays on Value, Competition and Utility. English translationof a collection of Dmitriev's essays published in 1904 in Russian,edited with an introduction by D.M. Nuti, Cambridge: CambridgeUniversity Press.

Duffner, H. and Huth, T. 2013 [1987]. 'Georg Charasoffs Theoryof Value, Output, and Prices of Production'. Mimeo: University ofBremen. This article, which was written in 1987 and circulated inmimeographed form, was published in 2013 as working paper no. 279 in theLeuphana University of Luneburg Working Paper Series in Economics.

Eckstein, G. 1909. 'Zur Marxschen Wertlehre. Rezension vonWilhelm Hohoff, Die Bedeutung der Marxschen Kapitalkritik (1908) undGeorg von Charasoff, Karl Marx uber die menschliche und kapitalistischeWirtschaft (1909)', Literarische Rundschau. 2. Beilage desVorwarts. Berliner Volksblatt 26 (44/21): Sunday, 21 February 1909.

Egidi, M. 1998. 'Charasoff, Georg von', in H.D. Kurz andN. Salvadori (eds), The Elgar Companion to Classical Economics, Vol. I.Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.

Egidi, M. and Gilibert, G. 1984. 'La Teoria oggettiva deiprezzi', Economia Politico 1 (1): 43-61.

Egidi, M. and Gilibert, G. 1989. 'The Objective Theory ofPrices', Political Economy. Studies in the Surplus Approach 5:59-74. (English version of Egidi and Gilibert 1984.)

Gagliardi, E., Nabholz, H. and Strobl, J. (eds). 1938. DieUniversitat Zurich 18331933 und ihre Vorlaufer. Zurich: Verlag derErziehungsdirektion.

Gehrke, C. 2015. 'Spuren einer Lebensreise: Georg vonCharasoff (1877-1931)', in H.M. Trautwein (ed.), Studien zurEntwicklung der okonomischen Theorie XXX. Berlin: Duncker & Humblot.

Gillespie, A.D. 2009. 'Through a Glass Darkly: Doubling andPoetic Self-Image in Pushkin's "The Gypsies'", TheRussian Review 68: 451-76.

Goenner, H. 2005. Einstein in Berlin. Munich: Beck.

Hanke, E. 1993. Prophet des Unmodernen: Leo N. Tolstoi alsKulturkritiker in der deutschen Diskussion der Jahrhundertwende.Tuebingen: De Gruyter.

Hasty, O.P. 1999. Pushkin's Tatiana. Madison: University ofWisconsin Press.

Hausmann, G. 1998. Universitat und stadtische Gesellschaft inOdessa 1865-1917. Stuttgart: Franz Steiner.

Holzhey, H. 1986. Cohen und Natorp. Vol. 1: Ursprung und Einheit.Die Geschichte der "Marburger Schule" als Auseinandersetzungum die Logik des Denkens. Vol. 2: Der Marburger Neukantianismus inQuellen. Zeugnisse kritischer Lekture. Briefe der Marburger. Dokumentezur Philosophiepolitik der Schule. Basel and Stuttgart: Schwabe.

Howard, D. 1993. 'Einstein and Eindeutigkeit: A NeglectedTheme in the Philosophical Background to General Relativity', in J.Eisenstaedt and A.J. Knox (eds), Studies in the History of GeneralRelativity, Vol. 3 of Einstein Studies, edited by D. Howard and J.Stachel. Boston: Birkhauser.

Howard, D. 1994. 'Einstein, Kant, and the Origins of LogicalEmpiricism', in W.C. Salmon and G. Wolters (eds), Logic, Languageand the Structure of Scientific Theories. Pittsburgh: University ofPittsburgh Press.

Howard, M.C. and King, J.E. 1992. A History of Marxian Economics,Vol. II: 1929-1990. Princeton: Princeton University Press.

Howard, M.C. and King, J.E. 2000. 'Natalie Moszkowska',in R.W. Dimand, M.A. Dimand and E. Forget (eds), A BiographicalDictionary of Women Economists. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.

Huser, K. 2003. Eine revolutionare Ehe in Briefen. DieSozialrevolutionarin Lidija Petrowna Kotschetkova und der AnarchistFritz Brupbacher. Zurich: Chronos Verlag.

Janecek, G. 1996. Zaum: The Transrational Poetry of RussianFuturism. San Diego, CA: San Diego University Press.

Janecek, G. 1998. 'Dada in Central and Eastern Europe',in G. Janecek and T. Omuka (eds), The Eastern Dada Orbit: Russia,Georgia, Ukraine, Central Europe and Japan. New York: G.K. Hall.

Jersild, A. and Melkadze, N. 2002. 'The Dilemmas ofEnlightenment in the Eastern Borderlands: The Theater and Library inTbilisi', Kritika: Explorations in Russian and Eurasian History3(1): 27-49.

Joravsky, D. 1970. The Lysenko Affair. Cambridge: HarvardUniversity Press.

Kautsky, K. 1921. Georgien. Eine sozialdemokratischeBauernrepublik. Eindrucke und Beobachtungen. Vienna: WienerVolksbuchhandlung.

Kharazov, G.A. 1919a. 'Son Tat'iany (Opyt tolkovaniia poFreidu) [Tatiana's dream (A Freudian interpretation)]', Ars 1:9-20.

Kharazov, G.A. 1919b. 'Fuga [Poem]', Ars 1: 51-2.

Kharazov, G.A. 1924. Introduction to Theoretical Political Economy.Lectures by Prof. G.A. Kharazov in the Academic Year 1923-24 at theFaculty of Economics (in Russian). Baku: Azerbaijan PolytechnicInstitute.

Kharazov, G.A. 1925a. 'The Average Principle of Relativity (inRussian)', Bulletin of the Communist Academy 4:321-5.

Kharazov, G.A. 1925b. 'Comment on V.M. Friche's report"Freidizm i iskusstvo"', Vestnik Kommunisticheskoiakademii 12: 256-7.

Klyukin, P. 2008. 'Creative Heritage: Charasoff in the Contextof the Economic Theory of Reproduction, (in Russian)', Voprosyekonomiki 2: 133-49.

Konigsberger, L. 1902-03. Hermann von Helmholtz. In 3 vols.Braunschweig: Friedrich Vieweg und Sohn.

Konigsberger, L. 1906. Hermann von Helmholtz. Oxford: Clarendon.

Kriegshaber, M. 1908. Uber die Verdoppelung des weiblichenGenitalapparates und die damit zusammenhangenden Folgen. Gruningen: J.Wirz.

Kruchenykh, A. 1995. Our Arrival: From the History of RussianFuturism. Moscow: RA.

Kurbanovsky, A.A. 2008. 'Freud, Tatlin, and the Tower: HowSoviet Psychoanalysts Might Have Interpreted the Monument to the ThirdInternational', Slavic Review 67 (4): 892-906.

Kurz, H.D. 1989. 'Die deutsche theoretische Nationalokonomiezu Beginn des 20. Jahrhunderts zwischen Klassik und Neoklassik', inB. Schefold (ed.), Studien zur Entwicklung der okonomischen TheorieVIII. Berlin: Duncker & Humblot.

Kurz, H.D. and Salvadori, N. 1993. 'Von Neumann's GrowthModel and the Classical Tradition', The European Journal of theHistory of Economic Thought 1 (1): 129-60.

Kurz, H.D. and Salvadori, N. 1995. Theory of Production. ALong-Period Analysis. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Kurz, H.D. and Salvadori, N. 2000. '"Classical"Roots of Input-output Analysis: A Short Account of its LongPrehistory', Economic Systems Research 12: 153-79.

Margarotto, L. et al. (eds). 1982. L'avanguardia a Tiflis.Venice: Universita degli studi di Venezia.

Markov, V. 1968. Russian Futurism: A History. Berkeley: Universityof California Press.

Marzaduri, M. 1982. 'Futurismo Menscevico', in L.Margarotto et al. (eds), L 'avanguardia a Tiflis. Venice:Universita degli studi di Venezia.

Matlaw, R. 1959. 'The Dream in Yevgeniy Onegin, with a Note onGore at Uma', Slavonic and East European Review 37: 487-503.

Miller, M.A. 1998. Freud and the Bolsheviks: Psychoanalysis inImperial Russia and the Soviet Union. Yale: Yale University Press.

Mori, K. 2007. 'Eine dogmenhistorische Dualitat in derReproduktions- und Preistheorie: Georg von Charasoff und KeiShibata', Marx-Engels-Jahrbuch 2006:118-41.

Mori, K. 2008. 'Maurice Potron's Linear Economic Model: ADe Facto Proof of The Fundamental Marxian Theorem', Metroeconomica59 (3): 511-29.

Mori, K. 2011. 'Charasoff and Dmitriev: An AnalyticalCharacterisation of Origins of Linear Economics', InternationalCritical Thought 1(1): 76-91.

Mori, K. 2013. 'Georg von Charasoff's Linear EconomicAnalysis and Anticipation of von Mises Iteration in EconomicAnalysis'. Paper presented at the

Conference 'The Pioneers of Linear Models of Production'at the University of Paris Ouest, Nanterre, 17-18 January 2013.

Moride, P. 1909. 'Review of Charasoff (1909)', Revued'histoire des doctrines economiques et sociales 2: 427-8.

Morishima, M. 1973. Marx's Economics. A Dual Theory of Valueand Growth. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Moszkowska, N. 1917. Arbeiterkassen an den privaten Berg- undHuttenwerken im Konigreich Polen. Ein Beitrag zur Geschichte derWohlfahrtseinrichtungen der Arbeitgeber. Stuttgart: Dietz.

Moszkowska, N. 1929. Das Marxsche System. Ein Beitrag zu dessenAusbau. Berlin: Engelmann.

Neumann, J. von. 1945-46 [1937], 'A Model of General EconomicEquilibrium', Review of Economic Studies 13 (1): 1-9.

Nikolskaia, T.L. 1980. 'Russian Writers in Georgia in1917-1921', in E. Proffer and C.R. Proffer (eds), The ArdisAnthology of Russian Futurism. Ardis: University of Michigan.

Nikolskaia, T.L. 1998. 'The Reception of Dadaism inGeorgia', in G. Janecek and T. Omuka (eds), The Eastern Dada Orbit:Russia, Georgia, Ukraine, Central Europe and Japan. New York: G.K. Hall.

Nikolskaia, T.L. 2000. Fantasticheskii gorod: Russkaia ikul'turnaia zhizn' Tbilisi (1917-1921) [Fantastical City:Russian and Cultural Life of Tbilisi (19171921)]. Moscow: Piataiastrana.

Okishio, N. 1961. 'Technical Changes and The Rate ofProfit', Kobe University Economic Review 7: 85-99.

Parys, W. 2013. 'All but one: How pioneers of linear economicsoverlooked Perron-Frobenius mathematics'. Paper presented at theConference 'The Pioneers of Linear Models of Production' atthe University of Paris Ouest, Nanterre, 17-18 January 2013. Alsoavailable as Economics research paper no. 2013-030 at the University ofAntwerp.

Parys, W. 2014. 'Why didn't Charasoff and Remak usePerron-Fobenius mathematics?', The European Journal of the Historyof Economic Thought 21 (6): 991-1014.

Pasternak, B. 1990 [1928]. 'O Lili Kharazovoi [On LilyCharasoff]', Literaturnoe obozrenie 2: 17-8.

Pfemfert, F. (ed.). 1911-32. Die Aktion. Wochenschrift fur Politik,Literatur und Kunst. Berlin.

Plekhanov, G. 1976. 'Synopsis of the Lecture "ScientificSocialism and Religion'", in G. Plekhanov, SelectedPhilosophical Works, Vol. 3. Moscow: Progress Publishers.

Plyutto, P. 1998. 'Pioneers in Systems Thinking: Bogdanov andVernadsky', in J. Biggart, P. Dudley and F. King (eds), AlexanderBogdanov and the Origins of Systems Thinking in Russia. London: Ashgate.

Raabe, P. (ed.). 1961. Die Aktion. 1. Jg. 1911. Reprint with anIntroduction and Comment by Paul Raabe. Munich: Kosel.

Raabe, P. (ed.) 1964. Die Zeitschriften und Sammlungen desliterarischen Expressionismus 1910-1921. Munich: Metzler.

Ram, H. 2004. 'Modernism on the Periphery: Literary Life inPost-revolutionary Tbilisi', Kritika: Explorations in Russian andEurasian History 5(2): 367-82.

Rancour-Laferriere, D. 1989. 'Pushkin's Still UnravishedBride: A Psychoanalytic Study of Tat'jana's Dream',Russian Literature 25(2): 215-58.

Russische Psychoanalytische Vereinigung 1926.'Sitzungsberichte 1925', Internationale Zeitschrift furPsychoanalyse 12: 125-6.

Schmidt, C. 1909. 'Grundriss zu einem System der theoretischenNationalokonomie', Sozialistische Monatshefte 13 (19/20) (7 October1909): 1197-1214, and 13 (21) (21 October 1909): 1317-36.

Schmidt, C. 1910. 'Georg Charasow, Das System des Marxismus(Buchbesprechung)', Sozialistische Monatshefte 14 (13) (30 June1910): 850-4.

Senn, A.E. 1973. 'Nicolai Rubakin's Library forRevolutionaries', Slavic Review 32: 555-9.

Sieg, U. 1994. Aufstieg und Niedergang des MarburgerNeukantianismus. Die Geschichte einer philosophischen Schulgemeinschaft.Studien und Materialien zum Neukantianismus, vol. 4. Wurzburg:Konigshausen und Neumann.

Sieveking, H. 1977. Werdegang eines Hamburger Gelehrten.Erinnerungen 1877-1914. Edited by G. Ahrens. Hamburg: Gesellschaft derBucherfreunde zu Hamburg.

Sraffa, P. 1960. Production of Commodities by Means of Commodities.Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Stamatis, G. 1999. 'Georg Charasoff: A Pioneer in the Theoryof Linear Production Systems', Economic Systems Research 11: 15-30.

Steenson, G.P. 1991. Karl Kautsky 1854-1938. Marxism in theClassical Years. Pittsburgh: University of Pittsburgh Press.

Tikka, P. 2008. Enactive Cinema: Simulatorium Eisensteinense.Helsinki: University of Art and Design Publication Series.

Tugan-Baranovsky, M. 1905. Theoretische Grundlagen des Marxismus.Leipzig: Duncker & Humblot.

Vachtova, L. 1994. 'Russland. Tiflis, Rostow am Don', inR. Meyer et al. (eds), Dada global. Die Dada Sammlung des KunstbausZurich. Zurich: Limmat Verlag.

Vizgin, V.P. 1999. 'The Nuclear Shield in the"Thirty-year war" of Physicists against Ignorant Criticism ofModern Physical Theories', Physics-Uspekhi 42(12): 1259-83.

Voronskij, A.K. 1998. Art as the Cognition of Life: SelectedWritings, 1911-1936. Oak Park, Michigan: Mehring Books.

Wolf, J. 1892. Sozialismus und kapitalistischeGesellschaftsordnung. Kritische Wurdigung beider als Grundlegung einerSozialpolitik. Stuttgart: J.G. Cotta.

Christian Gehrke, Department of Economics, University of Graz,Resowi-Centre F4, A-8010 Graz, Austria. Email:[emailprotected]. An earlier version of this paper waspresented at the 16th Annual Conference of the European Society for theHistory> of Economic Thought in Saint-Petersburg, Russia, 17-19 May2012, and at the Conference 'The Pioneers of Linear Models ofProduction', 17-18 January 2013, at the University of Paris-Ouest,Nanterre. A much longer German version, which was presented at theAusschuss fur die Geschichte der Wirtschaftswissenschaften of the Vereinfur Socialpolitik in Marbach/Neckar, 14-15 June 2012, is forthcoming inthe conference proceedings (see Gehrke 2015). I would like to thank thesession participants as well as two anonymous referees for most helpfulcomments and suggestions. I am also grateful to the staff of the variousarchives mentioned in the paper for help and advice. Special thanks aredue to Francis Allisson (Lausanne), Aaron Figursky (Graz and Moscow),Guido Hausmann (Jena), Karin Huser (Zurich), Peter Klyukin (Moscow),Werner Moritz (Heidelberg), Nino Parsadanishvili (Tbilisi) and WilfriedParys (Antwerp). Finally, I would also like to thank MariaKristoferitsch (Graz), Andrea Kubista (Vienna), and Sigrid Wahl (Graz)for translations from Russian sources. Of course, any errors oromissions are my responsibility.